Leading civil groups have urged a "no" vote on the new constitution next month, complaining that it fails to adequately address the rights and grievances of the people it is supposed to serve.
The groups, which held a seminar at Thammasat University yesterday, said the draft restricted rights on environmental issues and public hearings, and failed to address public health issues across the economic spectrum.
Consumer rights groups said they were being denied a voice.
The seminar also covered provisions relating to the tackling of corruption.
Amarin Saichan of the Enlaw Foundation, a non-profit legal group, said the draft restricts rights relating to environmental issues, such as the right to act to protect the environment.
It also fails to guarantee public hearings to gather feedback on development projects.
Mr Amarin said the draft emphasises fair water and garbage management and the importance of climate change. But it fails to mention how to reduce garbage and does not outline legal measures that allow the public to take part in waste management.
"For this reason, our stance is that we will not accept the draft," he said.
Sureerat Trimakkha, coordinator for the People's Health System Movement, said the draft was drawn up by people with archaic ideas about the public health service system.
The state provides universal health care for all, but the draft only focuses on the needy and the underprivileged, which are hard to define.
She said the government should distribute wealth to the poor through taxes instead of curbing the rights of people.
"The network has decided to vote 'no,' " she said.
Saree Aongsomwang, secretary-general of the Foundation for Consumers, criticised the draft for curbing the right of consumer protection groups to determine measures to protect the public. Their role, she said, is reduced to that of only representatives of the public.
It means that people will have to rely solely on state agencies such as the Consumer Protection Board under the Prime Minister's Office, which she said never dares to oppose the government.
"The people want someone they can rely on when they are in trouble. We feel that the government attaches too much importance to the business sector while ignoring the civil sector," Ms Saree said.
Atthapol Anantaworasakul, director of the Thai Civic Education Network, said he was concerned about provisions on free education.
The draft says the 12-year state-subsidised education plan will start at preschool level and end at Mathayom 3, compared with the current one which starts at Prathom 1 and ends at Mathayom 6.
The change means students at high school level from Mathayom 4 to 6 will have no guaranteed access to free education.
Meanwhile, the Committee of Relatives of the May 1992 Heroes yesterday issued a statement saying it will boycott the draft prepared by the Constitution Drafting Committee led by Meechai Ruchupan.
The committee said the draft was designed to pave the way for a non-elected outsider to become prime minister and to prolong the military regime's hold on power.
The committee said the Meechai draft was similar to the constitution of 1991 which was blamed for sparking the Black May violence the following year.
The Open Forum for Democracy Foundation called on state agencies to create a favourable climate for discussion before the referendum.
The foundation noted that freedom of expression for the public was still limited compared to the 2007 charter referendum.