They all bring some expertise useful in the drafting of a constitution, I suppose, right?

I wonder what their prior political experience has been, whether they were involved in the drafting of the 1997 constitution? I guess a lot of the research that goes on at the King Prajadhipok Institute (PKI) influenced the drafting of the constitution and politics under the constitution?

Editorial: “Although hailed as one of the best charters ever written, the 1997 Constitution has proved to be no match for tricky politicians of the Thaksin administration.”

I know the appointments for some key commissions were never even made and the NHRC was completely ignored, but the history of 1997 constitution and how it succeeded and failed, I guess no one has written anything about it yet?

I particularly like the last paragraph:
“Although hailed as one of the best charters ever written, the 1997 Constitution has proved to be no match for tricky politicians of the Thaksin administration. One particular area the charter drafters need to take a serious look at and to rectify is the check-and-balance mechanisms, which include all the independent organisations that were originally thought capable of coping with political abuses or excesses, but instead proved to be ineffective. But, in the end, a constitution no matter how good, is not the ultimate answer to political reform. It is just the tool by which a nation like Thailand fulfils its political aspirations _ the success of which depends largely on the users of the charter. Which, in this case, means the politicians and, especially, the voters. If most of our voters continue to vote with their hearts rather than their minds, or continue to vote for whoever offers them the highest price, we will continue to have the same kind of unscrupulous politicians in parliament. And all the effort spent on writing the best ever constitution would have been a complete waste.”

Democracy has a long way to go in Thailand, as evidenced by the fact that someone as flawed and discredited as Thaksin continued to receive electoral support.

I’ll let Srithanonchai clarify as to what makes them close knit, except to say that most Thai universities promote their leadership from within. This leads to horrible university politics.

You mean they taught there? Law, I presume. What makes them close-knit?

The BMW executive who received the 2nd greatest number of votes (Pharani Leenuthapong) and the Nong Bua Lamphu construction contractor who received the 3rd greatest number of votes (Suwit Pipatwilaikul) were not chosen.

Yet the junta gave an approving nod to 4 NPA members who received the lowest number of votes (7). They were Phisit Lee-Atham (a Democrat), Wichai Roobkhamdee (an academic), Wicha Mahakhun (a Supreme Court judge), and Apichart Damdee (a comedian).

Again, let’s not think too much about this comic horse and pony show. Because these 100 will not be drafting the constitution. These 100 will be distilled by the junta into a group of 25 hard-core loyalists. These loyalists will be “assisted” by another 10 direct junta lackeys. And we all know that Sonthi has his own personal ideas on how the constitution will look.