I am disappointed that your editorial on Wednesday misrepresented my position regarding the issue of amending the constitution and failed to study the details of the current proposed amendments. My position for this matter has never wavered. I did say that the constitution should be amended and, during my administration, we passed two amendments in line with the recommendations of an all-party committee set up by the then parliament president.
Regarding my support for the election of senators, I have always insisted that this must come with a review of the power of the Senate. If we wanted a politically neutral Senate, we have to think about how not to fall into the same trap that we did during Thaksin Shinawatra's time in power. What's unacceptable with the current proposal is that it removes term limits and does not stipulate an electoral system (both stipulated in the 1997 constitution), which helps reduce interference by political parties and provincial powers.
Concerning the disbanding of political parties, while I agree that parties should not be disbanded because of electoral fraud, my stance has always been that executives and members of executive boards should take responsibility for any illegal actions that they are party to, or aware of, but fail to prevent. This is not what the current proposal seeks to do. Worse, it then goes on to remove the rights of individuals to take political parties whose actions undermine the constitution to the Constitution Court.
This article is older than 60 days, which we reserve for our premium members only.You can subscribe to our premium member subscription, here.