Further to my previous comments about the “unrepresentative swill” of Senates, I was interested to read the following snippet from The Nation:
Controversy over the allocation of debating time caused a walkout of some CDA [Constitution Drafting Assembly] members, forcing yesterday’s session to be suspended for two hours. CDA member Chirmsak Pinthong led the walkout after 90 minutes of the morning session. He was trying to convince other members to back his bid to reject the existence of the Senate. He disagreed with the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), whose draft supports the parliamentary system with two bodies, the Senate and the House of Representatives. Chirmsak said history had proved neither non-elected nor elected senators had provided much benefit for the nation. Only the House was enough to run the legislative tasks because its committees and the Council of State had overseen and checked legal affairs, he said, adding it was unnecessary to have a Senate.
There are at least three separate arguments going on here.
1) Does Thailand need a Senate. If so why? What would its role be? The aim of the 1997 consitution seemed to be to balance and provide oversight of the more political pairliment.
2) Would the Senate be elected or appointed?
3) How much power would it have?
I have always suspected that the military wants a strong senate (ie. able to stop legislation, remove politicians, head graft committees, etc.). They then want to stack it with appointed (or hald appointed) cronies who will do their bidding. This would ensure that the elected government never really runs the country. It could aslo ensure that a constitution is never abolished.
They just have to:
1) Put a clause in the constitution that says it requires a majority of the Senate and Parliment to change the constitution
2) Have the new constitution say that half of Senators are appointed.
3) Celebrate
The benefits of an elected senate are debatable. The purpose of an appointed Senate is obvious.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The headline of the article actually reads “Single-member MPs dropped by the CDA.” In the body of the article, nothing more is said about this most important issue. It is also not said whether the constituency/party-list system will continue to be a segmented system, in which both parts do not have anything do do with each other, or whether they will use a proportional logic to determine the number of MPs a party can claim. This would be a major reform, and indeed it has been discussed within CDC and CDA. The article does not tell us about this issue, neither about the reasons that had led the CDA to switch from SMC to MMC. We also don’t learn how many members of the CDA voted for and against it. Very poor reporting in the tradition of The Nation. But Bangkok Post wasn’t any better. Hopefully, the Thai-language press will provide some more detail.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
To my idea, before we answer “Does Thailand need a senate?”, you may have to ask “Will Thailand have real Democracy?”.
Indeed, we may have to think whether since 24 June 1902 we really have democracy. As a Thai citizen, I could not demistify such things.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Anyway, the propaganda campaign in favor of the constitution has already started–even before it’s final version has been approved. The government’s PR people have been erecting billboards and cutouts. And on June 25, I came across the first newspaper advertisements (full-page in Matichon, half-page in Thai Rath), urging people to join forces with their “yes” vote in the referendum so that there might be an election. “Yes” and “elections” are printed in huge letters, suggesting that the election is the main selling point of the the constitution.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dr Chirmsak Pinthong used to be one of the Senators. He observed that approx. 80 Senators always voted/approved TRT/Thaksin’s policies (policy corruption). These were the same people who are relatives and friends of Thaksin and TRT. In (right) principle, nothig is wrong to have the Senator. But who they are and how to select them become problematic in Thailand in the previous government. That’s why Dr Chirmsak commented that “… history had proved…”.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Sydney,
Yes and now Chirmsak is voting/approving all the junta’s policies. Policy corruption is in the eye of the beneficiary.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
To Comment#3
It is 1932 (not 1902).
Democracy comes from real debates and practices that will always involve fussy, entangled details like this. It is a matter of engaging the public in the debates. It is undemocratic when the elites (politicians, military, monarchists) think that they know best — and sadly that’s often the case. By the way, anyone read that news on TOT board and Saprang?
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/06/23/business/business_30037596.php
http://www.bangkokpost.net/topstories/topstories.php?id=119629
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The problem is the rules for the senate are currently wrong. The changes that should be made are beyond me.
However, when the rule states that a person cannot sit in both parliament and senate, the point of the rule is obviously not meant to mean that a husband can sit in the parliament and a wife in the senate.
Until law writers get more precise in their language there will always be people who can get around it.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dear Obbserver,
I can’t answer on behalf of Dr Chirmsak or what he really thinks about when he decided to involve with this drafting process. Someone will have to do it.
But the news originally posted by the Nation (and Andrew in this website) suggests that he walkout showing disagreement with some details of the CDC draft.
Now I would think that if the CDC wants to have this part about the Senate included in the draft, perhaps it may allows “someone” who are closely related to the Janta to take control the Senate in the future. This could happen.
Anyone has more information please share with us. Thanks.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
After reports that he used a trip to Europe as an opportunity to visit his wife, who is a Thai ambassador to an European country, Dr. Chirmsak is now in the news again for opposing the inclusion of Buddhism as state religion. Can anyone here enlighten me if that particular trip was morally correct or opportunistic in nature?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
ดาวน์โหลด คู่มือประชาชน โหวตล้มรัฐธรรมนูญคณะรัฐประหาร
(people-guide-book.pdf, 1MB)
http://www.wevoteno.net/web/archives/32
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I’m for the draft. At least let the MPs in the future correct it. IF we really have faith in elected-MPS, ones we keep considering them as an index of democracy.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0