• 
• 

Let me be upfront - I have no magical reason to convince anyone to say "yes" to the August 19 referendum.

In fact, I don't think there is a foolproof logical argument for an unequivocal "yes" or "no" to the charter. The world has yet to see an encompassing legal treatise without flaws.

But the country's highest law is not about logic or legal finesse; it is about establishing a road map for the political system.

Voters are going to cast their first-ever referendum ballots in Thailand to chart a course for democratic rule. And I believe that one's conscience is the best guide when voting on the draft constitution.

I have no doubt about a successful referendum because a clear majority of voters are expected to vote with a clear conscience. Unlike past votes, preparations for the referendum have been surprisingly free from cheating.

Political rivals may try to outwit one another about the pros and cons of the charter, however, in the end, voters will enter the balloting booths alone and have only their inner voices to listen to.

Allow me, dear readers, to share with you how and why my conscience dictates a "yes" vote.

Thais are known to be free people. From ancient history to modern times, Thais have fought against all kinds of oppression and always upheld the rule of law.

Under absolute monarchy, kings bowed to no one but the law laid down by their royal ancestors. Rogue leaders acting on whims often met with an unhappy ending.

In 1932, a peaceful transition brought about democracy with the King as head of state - a Thai concept for constitutional monarchy.

Democratic rule has thrived on Thai soil as the people find it compatible with their aspirations for freedom.

From its start, the introduction of popular democracy was unfortunately jinxed, admittedly a superstitious sentiment that can help explain many subsequent political events that happened without rhyme or reason.

Unlike popular democracy in other countries, the terms of elected governments in Thailand have been interspersed with periodic military interventions.

The country is at the forefront of democratic rule, yet it has seen no less than 17 coups and no one can say for certain when the vicious cycle of coup-to-charter-rewrite-to-elections will end.

For lack of a better explanation, many political observers have blamed the 1932 bloodless coup to end absolute monarchy as setting a bad precedent and why soldiers keep marching out of their barracks.

Last September 19 saw the latest repeat of this vicious cycle. The coup happened without any notable resistance. The charter rewrite is now completed. The country is about to bring about a general election in order to complete the restoration of popular democracy.

Listening to my conscience, I see the referendum as an indispensable link to cross over from military rule to an elected government.

I stand for democracy without wavering. I expect my "yes" vote to contribute to the resumption of popular democracy.

My referendum vote is not about the coup or the junta or whether the charter is good or bad, or any political figures, but rather it is about bringing back democracy and ending military rule as soon as possible.

For the past 75 years, every Thai constitution has been linked to a coup in one way or the other. Even the suspended 1997 constitution was a byproduct of the 1990 coup.

I see no difference between the 2007 junta-sponsored charter and the suspended provisions initiated by previous military interventions. Why should one charter linked to a junta be preferable to another?

In case of a 'no' vote in the referendum, the junta will step in and enact a charter rewrite of its own choice. No one will be any wiser with a charter offered for a referendum vote or another version completely imposed by the junta.

But everyone may have to brace for a delayed general election in light of political glitches in connection with a charter rejection.

The Thai political system keeps evolving over time as reflected by a series of constitutions. And the people's aspirations have advanced in every charter rewrite.

If anyone cares to notice, the duration of an elected government's term in office keeps getting longer while the span of military rule gets shorter and shorter.

For the last two interventions, coup leaders promptly set a one-year limit in order to avoid the people's wrath.

My conscience says vote "yes" in order to advance democracy forward. I hope voters will cast ballots for the future rather than dwell on the past.

Avudh Panananda

The Nation

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why the draft charter should be rejected

The junta-sponsored draft constitution is a sham in terms of its process and inception, and its content will enable the military and bureaucracy to rule over people largely unchecked.

But, most importantly, a clear message needs to be sent to the generals that citizens are not subjects to be ruled through a form of managed pseudo-democracy and that we will play no role in encouraging more military intervention in the future.

Soon after the current junta staged an illegitimate military coup - not that there is such a thing as a legitimate coup - their fingerprints were all over the process that led to the new constitution. It starts with the fact that they either directly or indirectly appointed all members of the Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) and the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC). Some are friends and unabashed supporters of the junta. Two of the charter drafters are election commissioners - and will be overseeing the referendum on Sunday.

Also, the very people who tore up the 1997 "People's Charter" last September, suddenly claim that they are for a supreme law. General Sonthi Boonyaratglin claims he staged the coup to help "restore democracy", only to, nearly a year later, keep the public and media guessing as to whether he will run for office or not. Time and again during the meetings of the drafting committee, members of the press heard patronising remarks from some drafters who said that people are too uneducated and ignorant to decide their own faith - so roughly half of the Senate would be appointed by a small committee under the new charter.

Then there's the way the Council for National Security has blackmailed the public by not revealing which old charter it would revive and how it would amend it if their draft is rejected on Sunday. The junta's message is clear: Accept this draft, or else.

There will also be no third box on the ballot for those who want to reject the process altogether. The Election Commission lamely claims that by the time they were told about it, it was too late to make changes.

Campaigns against the junta's draft charter have been harassed by the junta-appointed government and stickers against the draft on taxis have been made illegal.

The government, instead of playing it neutral, has launched campaigns and mass demonstrations to cajole people into voting 'yes'.

About half of the country's provinces remain under the martial law.

Content-wise, the draft charter, aside from not trusting the people to elect all senators, also drags the judiciary into politics by giving them the power to appoint members of so-called independent organisations.

Most of the freedoms that are claimed to be in the draft charter are subject to suspension by the Internal Security Bill, which the junta and its government are trying to pass.

Also, the draft stipulates a big boost to military budgets, by requiring future governments to spend more on arms while no new checks and balances will be put in place to keep the military from meddling in politics again.

There are positive aspects to the draft and some of its drafters are well intentioned. However, when we consider the larger picture of what the junta-sponsored draft charter and referendum is all about, then it must be rejected because to encourage would be tantamount to legitimising last September's coup, and encouraging more coups in the future.

Some may want us to believe that we have to choose between the lesser of two evils - Thaksin Shinawatra and the coup-loving generals. But we can start paving the way for a third choice. This alternative will lay the foundation for citizens' self reliance and a democracy not informed by patronage politics.

The road to fixing Thai democracy is rough and winding and demands that citizens adhere to what is legitimate. We cannot right things by committing more wrongs or creating more problems in the long run. Let us try to end this vicious cycle of coups and killing constitutions.

An end to this cycle has to start somewhere. I say it can start this Sunday by citizens telling the generals that we will not allow them to drag Thailand further into a Dark Age in which citizens are ruled and oppressed as subjects, and the cycle of coups is perpetuated. There may be no easy way out after the referendum but let us send a clear message to the junta that their time is over. This 'No' vote is not just for us but for history as well as posterity - so that one day this land may be governed under a genuine democracy and people shall enjoy their rights and liberties.

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation