A Political Battle Over Thailand’s Constitutional Future
The People’s Party (PP) has achieved a small but significant victory in the Thai parliament this week, as its draft charter rewriting proposal became the primary legislation for constitutional amendment. Despite this progress, the political struggle over the future of the country’s constitution continues to intensify.
The PP, along with two other major parties—Bhumjaithai (BJT) and Pheu Thai—each have their own bill aimed at revising Section 256 of the current junta-sponsored charter. This section is crucial because it paves the way for establishing a Charter Drafting Assembly (CDA), which will be responsible for reworking the constitution. Each party wants to influence the composition of the CDA to shape the political direction of the country.
During the two-day deliberations, there was little evidence of coordinated efforts to create a better charter or foster reconciliation. Instead, the session revealed a new phase of political polarization, with Pheu Thai and the PP forming an unexpected alliance, while BJT remained isolated.
Initially, BJT aligned with the Senate to block Pheu Thai’s bill. This move prompted Pheu Thai to shift its support to the PP’s draft, which ultimately received 300 votes, compared to 287 votes for BJT’s version. In theory, BJT should have worked with the PP, given the latter’s support for Anutin Charnvirakul’s premiership bid. However, in practice, such alliances are temporary, and the two parties continue to compete fiercely over the charter rewriting process.
This dynamic confirms earlier observations: BJT benefits significantly from the current charter, which allows its networks to thrive within independent agencies. As a result, it is reluctant to support a new charter. However, BJT must align with the PP due to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that obliges the Anutin government to support the charter amendment. The next phase of political maneuvering will be critical to watch.
BJT remains confident and composed, knowing that the Senate will play a decisive role in determining the fate of the charter amendment. Constitutional amendments require an absolute majority from both houses of parliament plus at least one-third of the senators. It is widely reported that the so-called “blue-camp” senators, who make up nearly 75% of the 200-seat Senate, could either approve or block the bill.
What Will the CDA Look Like?
The proposed structure of the CDA varies among the different drafts. BJT’s draft suggests a selection process similar to the 2007 charter, where the parliament would choose members of the CDA, including provincial representatives and experts. This approach is seen as favorable to BJT, given its close ties to the Senate and independent agencies.
In contrast, the PP’s draft, along with Pheu Thai’s version, proposes a more direct method. It suggests that the CDA would consist of 35 members selected by parliament from 70 public-elected candidates, alongside a 100-member advisory council chosen directly from constituencies across all provinces. If adopted, this model would allow voters to elect experts who would help draft the constitution.
Another key difference lies in how each draft handles Sections 1 and 2 of the charter, which outline the country’s sovereignty as an undivided kingdom and its royal prerogatives. BJT’s draft explicitly prohibits amending these sections, while the PP’s version leaves the matter open, without specifying whether they intend to change these critical provisions.
The Next Steps in the Political Arena
The next phase of the process will involve the 43-member House panel tasked with charter rewriting. Currently, the balance of power is tight, with BJT and the Senate having fewer votes than a coalition of the PP, Pheu Thai, and minor parties. The panel is expected to finalize its work by mid-December to align with political timelines.
Several political maneuvers are anticipated in the coming weeks. BJT is likely to use all its resources to ensure that Section 256 is interpreted in a way that favors its interests, aiming to secure maximal dominance for its alliance and networks. If unsuccessful, the blue-camp senators may exercise their power to block the bill during the third reading or request the charter court to intervene, citing rulings that prohibit direct CDA elections or challenge the PP’s stance on lese majeste law.
If the bill fails, BJT may campaign against the charter amendment to have it rejected in the referendum scheduled for March 29. Additionally, Mr. Anutin could attempt to dissolve the House while the bill is under review, potentially delaying the entire process. The next government would then have two months to decide whether to continue the effort.
A Possible No-Confidence Motion
It is highly likely that Pheu Thai will seek a no-confidence motion in December to boost its popularity, which has been declining. Reports indicate that the party is planning to launch such a vote. If this occurs, Mr. Anutin may feel compelled to dissolve the House before the motion is submitted, according to legal requirements.
However, this scenario would be unfortunate, as it would halt all ongoing legal scrutiny, including the current charter rewriting process. This outcome would not benefit the public, as the country urgently needs a better charter to resolve its current political challenges.
Civic Engagement Is Critical
The civic sector and the general public must remain vigilant throughout this process to prevent any actions that could derail the charter rewriting initiative. The path forward is uncertain, but the stakes are high for the future of Thailand’s political landscape.
