Most of the people who voted for the draft charter on Aug 7 said they did so because they believed it would be better than the previous ones, and they wanted to see reform and political change, according to a survey by National Institute for Development Administration, or Nida Poll.
The poll was carried out on Aug 2-6, before the referendum, on 5,849 eligible voters who had already decided on which way they were going to vote.
The people who decided to vote for the draft charter gave various reasons when asked why. Most, or 38.95%, said they thought it would be better than the previous constitutions as it had been scrutinised by resourceful persons; 21.12% said they wanted to see reforms with political changes and a better economy; 8.51% said they liked the military-style working system of Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO); 8.02% wanted to see a government from a democratic election; and, 7.83% said the draft charter contained provisions to prevent corruption by political groups, to screen politicians and to punish politicians and government officials who are corrupt.
For those who decided to vote against the draft charter, 50.79% said they reached such a decision because some provisions in it were vague and unreasonable; 18.5% said the draft charter was without people's participation and undemocratic; 10.25% said they did not understand the essence of it; and, 8.66% said they did not like the working stye of the prime minister and the NCPO.
For those who decided to vote for the proposal for NCPO-appointed senators to vote along with members of the House of Representatives to elect the prime minister during the five-year transition, 27.54% reasoned that it was new and suitable for current political and social conditions; 26.33% said both senators and MPs represented the people and knew their peoblems well; 11.01% wanted to see the country develop and move forward without being disrupted by political conflicts; and 10.88% said the proposal would open way for new people, instead of old-faced politicians, to run the country's administration.
For those who decided to vote against the proposal, 79.24% said senators should come from or be elected by the people only, not from any other groups; 7.35% said they had no confidence in military-appointed senators; and 4.28% said the prime minister should be elected by MPs, not senators.