However, even people who do not approve of the military coup should now participate in the process to help improve and refine the proposed new charter. After all, anyone who is not happy with the final version can exercise their democratic right to reject it when a nationwide referendum is held to formally endorse - or oppose - it, in August or September.

That said, no one should have any illusions about this proposed constitution, which is designed to restore democracy in this country at a time of political uncertainty, economic instability and social division.

As such, the proposed new constitution cannot be expected to be anywhere near perfect. The coup is seen by many as having been a necessary evil. On one hand, it was the only possible way to overthrow the Thaksin regime and the culture of corruption and deceit it perpetuated in Thai society. But, on the other, it turned back the clock on democratic development in this country.

Under the best-case scenario, the proposed constitution will serve as a transitional foundation stone that would ensure a smooth transfer of power from the military-appointed interim government to a democratically-elected one. The worst-case scenario would see it become an instrument that might allow overly ambitious military leaders to manipulate politics so that they can maintain their grip on power.

The draft constitution contains many good points that are similar to those in the 1997 charter, particularly in regard to empowering people to participate in politics. However, critics have identified key points in the charter draft as problematic. These include: an over-reliance on the judiciary to reform politics at the expense of an effective system of checks and balances between the administrative, legislative and judicial branches of government; the proposal that the Senate be appointed instead of elected by the people; the empowerment of heads of 11 institutionally-mandated oversight agencies to exercise extraordinary powers to resolve a "national crisis", which is not clearly defined. There are other controversies, but these are the key points of contention.

We strongly hope that, when it prepares its final draft, the Constitution Drafting Assembly carefully considers the input from 12 oversight agencies as well as people from all walks of life.

It should be made very clear that Thailand's quest for a sustainable democracy will require much more than a well-written constitution. The first thing that we must do is to promote better understanding of the constitution, which is the codified embodiment of the democratic aspirations and consensus of people living in this society.

Thai people should take this opportunity to engage in some introspection to understand how they have contributed to the persistent failure of society to put a healthy, self-sustaining democracy in place after almost 75 years of trial and error.  Too many people continue to rely on the power of patronage to get things done instead of counting on democratic institutions and the rule of law to function the way they should to ensure that the administrative, legislative and judicial branches of government serve the people wisely, honestly and responsibly. This country needs politically-aware people who exercise their rights effectively in order for democracy to work the way it should.

This should provide the public debate on the final content of the proposed new constitution with some food for thought.