A thought about the charter has disturbed me for weeks. On the one hand, I have optimism as there is some progress in the political roadmap with the 315-section charter draft now finalised and put to a national debate.
On the other hand, I cannot deny the fact that our political transformation is single-handledly guided by a self-appointed group and that is against basic democratic principles.
I realise that numerous people in charge of resetting the Thai political system this time around are prominent personalities with good intentions.
Many are well-respected citizens, experienced bureaucrats, legal experts, civic group members and scholars. I know I should have welcomed their efforts after a political crisis caused by feuding politicians. Yet it is impossible for me to ignore the undemocratic aspect of the charter drafting.
The drafters have claimed the new charter will usher in a paradigm shift t้่hat serves as groundwork for reform and reconciliation.
Toward this goal, the new charter will introduce at least 10 "nanny" bodies — such as a Citizens Assembly, a Provincial Civic Scrutiny Council, and National Ethics Assembly — to screen and endorse candidates in the legislative and executive branches.
The charter will also set up an evaluation committee to assess the quality and ethical standards of political parties and groups, the Election Commission and National Anti-Corruption Commission.
More importantly, the new charter aims to push politicians into "forced reconciliation" — the term used by Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) members. It's clear we are to have weak coalition governments that would force two arch rivals, the Pheu Thai and Democrat parties, to work with each other. The charter also allows a non-elected PM.
In the name of unity, the charter envisages a National Reconciliation Committee (NRC), with 20 members including five from the conflicting factions. This entity requires royal endorsement.
A new Reform Driving Council — 60 members are from the NRC, 30 from the National Legislative Assembly and another 30 experts — will also be created.
Despite the public outcry, the draft charter is still pressing ahead with a merger of the Ombudsman and National Human Rights Commission. Many human rights advocates find this unacceptable.
The mixed member proportional (MMP) election system and the "open list" will replace an arrangement in which parties rank candidates on the party list. The CDC has defended the open-list idea, saying it is a way to empower people since they have a full say in ranking candidates, but others see it differently.
Chulalongkorn University political scientist Siripan Noksuan Sawasdee said the open-list system will force parties to field only well-known names to grab votes, rather than focusing on policy issues.
The new charter will also pave the way for direct and indirect selection of the 200-member Senate. The representatives from 77 provinces in the Senate will be screened by the provincial ethical committee. But bureaucrats will still maintain their old base in the Senate with 10 former permanent secretaries and 10 former heads of military units.
Professional groups will elect 15 representatives among themselves. Thirty will be elected from labour groups, farmers' groups, academics and communities. And another 58 will be nominated from prominent personalities by a committee which has yet to be created.
As the NRC debates the charter this week, society has been pressed into a mode of conformity, with the help of Section 44, which has replaced martial law. It is telling that the first draft has not been offered by the drafting committee or the government for public scrutiny.
Unsurprisingly, the NRC debate is seen by coup critics as a farcical forum merely to seek obedient endorsement for the draft.
The interim charter gives power to three bodies — the NRC, the cabinet and the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) — to scrutinise this 315-section charter and come up with amendments to the CDC, which will have up to 60 days to adjust it.
The final draft must be resubmitted to the NRC no later than July 23. The NRC then must make a decision on the draft no later than Aug 6.
If endorsed by the NRC, the draft must be submitted for royal approval no later than Sept 4. If not, however, both the NRC and CDC will be automatically dissolved and the drafting process has to restart again.
That's why Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has often reminded Thais to stop bickering or everything will go back to square one.
Yet in my opinion, the NCPO's lack of commitment to hold a referendum and set a clear election date shows it is being insincere or insecure, or both.
The powers-that-be must keep in mind that a referendum is a vital process to give citizens a final say on the charter. Without a referendum, the NRC/CDC, regardless of their good intentions, are still considered a rubber stamp for the NCPO, and it's unlikely that will win the public's trust.
Achara Ashayagachat is Senior News Reporter, Bangkok Post.