In an update to my post about the possible dissolution of Chat Thai, Matichima and PPP, the Bangkok Post's editorial (cache):

Election commissioner Sumeth Upanisakorn claimed on Wednesday that the organic law on political parties passed by the military-appointed government leaves him no choice but to recommend the dissolution of both Chart Thai and Matchimathipataya. Similarly, a junta-created law could see the ruling People Power party dissolved if executive member Yongyuth Tiyapairat is found guilty of vote buying.

Mr Sumeth cited the law as the "lock and chain" around the EC's neck and begged the public to understand its predicament. Sympathy aside, the EC and the general public must use their heads to consider a very tough question - not the one pertaining to the few cases at hand, but our long-term political future and what institutions do we want to nurture.

Looking at the differences between the new laws passed by the military and the old ones produced by an elected government, a strong case can be made that the potential dissolution cases will achieve little except destabilising the political system.

It's true that all the relevant laws are clear and unanimous on the matter - if the leader of a political party, or an executive member, commits a legal offence, that action is regarded as equivalent to the political party in question having exercised its power of administration in breach of the law. Can the bureaucrats and judges claim that they are simply upholding the law? Yes. But society must now ask a greater question: What kind of political system will produce a stable democracy in the long run?

It's clear that these laws were methodically changed so as to weaken politicians and stunt the growth of political parties. Society must now ask if that is the purpose we have in mind, or want to see happen. Do we want to put our faith in the tools of democracy - however imperfect they have proven to be - and try to strengthen them as best as we can while we go along? Or do we want to leave room for other powers to come into play in our politics? So, the debate here is not about whether Chart Thai or Matchimathipataya or PPP should be dissolved according to the law. Indeed, the law was written precisely so that parties would be dissolved. Rather, it is about whether the law itself should call for the parties to be dissolved.

Under the current laws written by the military and its supporters, the political parties will never grow strong and the system will never be stable. Allegations will always fly around, and the threat of dissolution will hang over every elected government, particularly those led by parties like PPP that aren't friends with the men in green. Is this what we want? Or do we want a stable democratic system in which the bad apples in a party can be prosecuted and those who did no wrong can proceed without punishment?

The laws now on the books are unworkable in nearly any democracy. For example, both the Republican and Democratic parties in the United States would have been dissolved long ago under Thailand's current laws.

Dissolving these parties will only create new clones and push the real decision-makers further into the shadows. The system will become more and more unstable and undemocratic, and could lead to more unrest. This is not a path we want to go down. Let's re-examine the laws now in an effort to build a stronger, more stable democracy.

BP: Exactly!

The Nation reports:

Deputy Premier and Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee yesterday called for a concerted effort to initiate amendments to the Constitution and its organic laws, to lift political stability and investor confidence.

The current atmosphere, fanned by growing speculation that coalition partners like the People Power (PPP) or Chart Thai parties could be dissolved, has dealt a hard blow to local and foreign investor confidence, he said.

"We must consider carefully what the cause of the problem is. Some Election Commission (EC) members said they had no choice but to follow the law," said Surapong, who is preparing to lead an international roadshow to promote Thailand abroad.

"It's like we're being legally constrained, so we may have to examine and see if some legislation is good for political development," he said, adding that an existing provision made it "too easy" to disband political parties.

Article 237 of the Constitution, governing the authority vested in the EC, should be amended, said Surapong.

"Apparently it's even easier than disbanding a business organisation. Is it appropriate for an offence committed by a party's executive members to lead to the disbanding of political parties formed by thousands of members?" he said.

Surapong, also secretary-general of the ruling PPP, asked MPs to help initiate the process of charter amendment, while voters in general may also join a signature campaign for amendments to be made.

There has also been speculation that coalition partners the Chart Thai and Matchima Thipataya parties could also be dissolved, due to electoral-fraud allegations against their executives.

As for the PPP, analysts believe the risk of being disbanded arose after the Supreme Court for Political Offences accepted the EC's vote-fraud case against House Speaker Yongyuth Tiyapairat, a PPP executive.

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, the PPP leader, reacted sternly to speculation that his party and two other coalition partners could be dissolved for electoral fraud. He warned that dissolution of the parties would have a severe adverse impact on the country.

Meanwhile, PM's Office Minister Choosak Sirinin said although several laws needed to be reviewed, the timing might not be right for amendments to the charter.

BP: Amending the Organic Acts is not enough, they would need to amend the constitution as well. What will Senate think of an amendment?

Related Posts by Categories

Widget by Scrapur