Referendum rules spark huge outcry

Referendum rules spark huge outcry

EC accused of violating rights

The sun sets behind the Democracy Monument on Ratchadamnoen Road, Bangkok. (Photo by Panumas Sanguanwong)
The sun sets behind the Democracy Monument on Ratchadamnoen Road, Bangkok. (Photo by Panumas Sanguanwong)

The Election Commission has been attacked by human rights advocates for crippling the ability of voters to discuss the constitution draft in the run-up to the referendum.

In particular they decried moves to restrict information vital to making an informed decision, banning the ticking of a "like" on internet and social media comments and stopping meetings unless certain agencies are represented.

Members of the National Human Rights Commission, the Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA), politicians and academics said the EC's planned regulations on the referendum were a violation of basic human rights.

The EC has issued a list of six "do's" and eight "don'ts" that are expected to be published in the Royal Gazette this week and become legally recognised.

HRLA president Pairote Polpetch told the Bangkok Post Sunday that the referendum rules restrict access to information and contradict international principles which allow voters free access to information and to discuss and debate without fear of intimidation.

National Human Rights Commission member Angkhana Neelapaijit, meanwhile, said the rules even covered modes of dress and simple pin-on badges.

Mr Pairote said the "do's" allow voters to express an opinion politely while avoiding distortions, and these are basic principles. But the eight "don'ts" were questionable as they ban the use of a "like" for messages on social media.

There were also interpretation difficulties with terms such as "aggressive" and "inciting unrest", said Mr Pairote, who is a former member of the Legal Reform Committee.

He disagreed with rule No 4 in the "don'ts" category which says seminars and debates could not be held without the participation of state agencies, educational institutes and media organisations.

He questioned the need for the agencies to take part in all forums. "With rule No 4, the free exchange of ideas will be restricted. Some civil organisations which want to hold forums for discussion in good faith cannot do so." Mr Pairote also rejected the ban on campaigns to persuade the public to vote one way or another.

"Referendums in other parts of the world are intended to decide an issue. I want to ask, what's the use of the Aug 7 referendum if there is such a ban?

"The Constitution Drafting Committee is now encouraging the public to vote in the referendum and is educating voters about the draft constitution.

"Does this amount to persuading the public that the draft is good? If so, then why can the CDC do it but not others?" he said.

Ms Angkhana, wife of missing human rights lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit, said the NHRC was concerned the EC rules violate basic human rights.

She pointed to the ban on opinions expressed on shirts, pins, ribbons and banners and other symbols.

She said people have the right to dress as they see fit.

She also raised concern about the ability of state authorities to judge what is right or wrong under the referendum rules.

"There is no clear definition of the term 'inciting unrest'. Everything is being left to the judgement of authorities. This will risk violating human rights," Ms Angkhana said.

The NHRC will discuss the rules and write to the EC and other agencies to express concern about violations of human rights.

Democrat Party deputy leader Ong-art Klampaibul said the rules are ambiguous and could be regarded as being a way to punish critics while benefitting those who support the draft.

He said there was nothing new with the six "do's" as they are an expansion of the referendum law, while the eight "don'ts" are already mentioned in Section 61 of the referendum law, which bans the dissemination of information that is distorted, violent, aggressive, rude or incites unrest.

Mr Ong-art urged the EC to make the regulations clearer to help those who want to express an opinion.

Deputy police spokesman Pol Col Krissana Pattanacharoen yesterday warned against the use of hashtags with "sarcastic" messages on social media that could violate the rules. He said the police have a team monitoring social media around the clock.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (23)