Since 1932, we have had 17 constitutions, and one would think that's 16 too many. One would think we should have it right by now, although we seem to keep getting it wrong over and over again. We get it wrong because we keep forgetting (or ignoring) the actual purpose of having a charter.
Bickering over the constitution is a never-ending squabble between politicians, the military and other powerful factions. This is for one reason and one reason only: Each side wants the charter to serve their purpose over the others'. Each side wants a charter that is exploitable by them and them only. Each side wants a charter that would put their political opponents at a disadvantage.
As such, the different factions conspire to influence the content and purpose of the charter. As such, the charter is always changing, depending on who's in power. As such, the charter gets more rewrites than a Hollywood script.
Is this a fair assessment? I could be wrong. You, dear readers, may decide for yourself.
Here's a humble and wholly unoriginal concept: The purpose of a charter is to serve the rights, liberties and benefits of the people, the citizenry. That might sound a bit radical, I know. But it's almost deadline time, and I've only started writing this column, so let's get a little crazy.
Recently I reread the 1997 Constitution, Chapter 3 (Sections 26-65): The rights and liberties of the Thai people - because this is what I do for fun in my spare time.
Section 30: All persons are equal before the law and shall enjoy equal protection under the law.
Section 31: A person shall enjoy the rights and liberty in his or her life and person.
Section 39. A person shall enjoy the liberty to express his or her opinion, make speeches, write, print, publicise and make expressions by other means.
Pretty cool stuff, eh? Then I also thought wait a second. Just about every government has broken the codes of the charter ever since it has been written, haven't they?
Is this a correct assessment? I could be wrong. You, dear readers, may decide for yourself.
The Abhisit government's only "legitimate" reason for not dissolving the parliament and calling for a general election is that it has tasked itself to oversee the changes for a new charter. That's fair enough. The opposition Puea Thai party is bickering and backing out of the charter changes. That's fair enough too.
The reason I'm saying all is fair enough, is because it isn't hard to imagine that right now both camps - and several other influential camps - are bickering over how to politically exploit and take advantage of the rewriting of the constitution. And who wants to be put at a disadvantage? They are only doing what they have to do.
Get your priorities straight, is all I'm saying. The reason for all the squabbling since 1932 and through the 17 charters and counting is because the priorities are all out of whack!
Is this a fair assessment? I could be wrong. You, dear readers, may decide for yourself.
Here are three questions I've been pondering:
1) How many Thais know that we actually have rights under the constitution?
2) Why do we have a charter if governments (and the military) aren't willing to uphold it and are more than happy to change it whenever and into whatever, to serve their agendas?
3) If all the other aspects of the charter (the executive, judicial, administrative and all the other good stuff) are written with the ultimate purpose of serving the rights, liberties and benefits of the citizenry, then there wouldn't be so much squabbling, would there?
For the process of writing the new charter, may I humbly suggest all the draftees refer to the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" and make sure to include all its contents? That's a bit bold and radical, I know.
But the layout designer is already calling for my column, and I'm not even close to getting finished writing, so let's get a bit crazy, shall we?
The 30 articles of the declaration are quite short and breezy, so it should be no difficult task to make them the key features of the charter.
In fact, dear readers, I believe everyone should carry around a copy of the "Declaration" with them. (Try reading the article on "equal rights under the law" to a policeman during a traffic stop - the look on his face is pure comedy and worth it in and of itself, even if it doesn't achieve anything else.)
So there you have it. Write for the people, not for factions. Write for the true purpose of a charter.
May I also humbly suggest that the government task itself to plaster the charter's content all over the internet? Do whatever it has to do to give easy access to the 65 million Thais who the charter concerns. Especially since the shortage of libraries in Thailand is shorter than the skirts of the ladies at RCA.
The United States' democracy isn't perfect. But even the most ignorant of its population will give you the rundown of his or her rights as a person and a citizen. That says something - something good.
Thailand's democracy is far from perfect. Because even the most educated Thai doesn't even know what rights he or she has as a person and a citizen. That says a lot of things, lots of unfortunate things.
What's the point of having rights if we don't even know we have them?
And since I'm being so humble in this column, let's throw in another request: If you wear a uniform and/or receive your salaries from taxes, do uphold the content of the constitution, please.
In fact, there should be an article in the charter about severe punishment for those who receive salaries from tax money, but do not uphold the charter. And by "severe punishment" I don't mean a transfer to another department or a ban from office - because really, that's just ridiculous.
It's past deadline and a couple of elderly Anglo-Saxon gentlemen are waiting to edit my piece, so they can hit the pubs sooner than later. Therefore, I'll keep my conclusion short: Let's get crazy, let's go nuts. Write the constitution to serve the rights, liberties and benefits of the people - and actually uphold the constitution!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment