Facing suspicion that it will extend the junta's rule while reducing people's power, CDC chairman Prasong Soonsiri insisted power will be eventually returned to the people.

The panel will pass its draft to the 100-member Constitution Drafting Assembly on April 19 for approval before the whole nation votes in the first referendum in Thai history.

The most controversial issue is whether the new charter will leave room for someone who was not elected to the Lower House to be appointed prime minister.

Although Thailand has had non-elected prime ministers - including General Prem Tinsulanonda, Anand Panyarachun and General Suchinda Kraprayoon - there are growing concerns that the junta will manipulate the new charter to cling to power.

It allegedly plans to appoint a key adviser to the Council for National Security or one of its nominees as premier.

"The drafters should make it clear that the new constitution will leave no room for an appointed prime minister," political scientist Prayad Hongthongkham said.

The 1992 uprising showed that the people did not want a non-elected premier, he noted.

Even if the drafters try to convince the public that they left room in the charter for an appointed premier only to provide an option for solving a leadership crisis, Prayad believes society is now so divided they will not be trusted.

Although Prayad supported a proposal to establish an ad hoc panel to cope with a national crisis, he warned the drafters to clearly explain that the panel, including high-ranking officials and senior judges, would have no authority to appoint a prime minister.

Otherwise, the public will see the ad hoc panel as a channel for the junta to cling to power.

Political scientist Asadang Panikabutr said the new charter should not leave room for a non-elected prime minister.

With people worried the military will hold sway over politics, he said the requirement in the previous charter that the prime minister be an MP should be kept as a guideline for the new one.

Asadang, however, is concerned that the drafting panel will try to deceive the people.

It may leave room for an unelected premier by writing "the PM should come from the Lower House" rather than "the PM should be a member of the Lower House", he warned.

Under those conditions, the Lower House members could select an outsider to assume the premiership, he explained.

Somsak Prissananunthakul, a deputy leader of Chat Thai Party, insisted the prime minister should be picked from the MPs.

An elected premier has the legitimacy required to lead the country, Somsak said.

Concerning the proposal to limit a prime minister to two four-year terms, Somsak said he was not opposed to the drafting panel fixing the period.

Local administrative leaders serve a maximum of two terms and this could be the same at the national level, he said.

The issue of party-list MPs is being widely debated among the CDC members. A number of them agree the party-list system should be cancelled.

Somsak disagrees. He said the system was the only channel for experts of various fields to enter politics, as they were not used to door-to-door campaigns.

The House should have a combination of experts and constituent MPs whom the people could ask for help directly, he added.

Prayad said the party-list system greatly benefited the country. It allowed qualified experts who lacked campaigning experience to sit in Parliament, he said.

The former ruling party, Thai Rak Thai, corrupted the system by putting some of its financial backers onto the party list as a reward for their support, Prayad said.

Another unresolved issue is whether to keep the Senate and whether to appoint or elect its members if the list is kept.

During the Thaksin administration, the Senate was lambasted for siding with the government, failing to examine crucial laws and being full of family members of the ruling party.

Asadang said the Senate had no use under existing circumstances. Every draft law, he said, was carefully written and checked by the government's legal teams and the Lower House members.

If the bill became debatable over its content, the government could ask the Council of State to review if it was proper or legal, he said.

Therefore, the Senate should be scrapped, he added.

Prayad agreed with the idea to scrap the Senate. If its duty was only to examine draft bills - but did not fully function in checking the government - it was better not to have it, he said.

He was concerned that an idea to add rules to prevent the Senate from being interfered with by national politicians in the Lower House - including a ban on family members of MPs from running for the Senate - could violate the right of individuals.

Another proposal requiring the government to support the three armed forces - the Army, Navy and Air Force - to acquire "up-to-date" weapons is also suspected of being written to serve the military's benefit.

Asadang said the size of the military needed to be reduced because the country was not at war or faced serious security threats.

If the idea was written into the new charter, the military could exploit it to force the government to provide what it needed, regardless of the public benefit.

Weerayut Chokchaimadon

 The Nation