Thailand does not need a special method to get a new leader, so do not try to twist the rules to get around the existing regime just to rid of certain players, a small group of scholars has warned.
They were responding to proposals made by Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, permanent secretary of justice Kittipong Kittiyarak and former Asean secretary general Surin Pitsuwan.
The academics said caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra should remain the leader, unless the Constitutional Court says otherwise, until the July 20 election is held and the results finalised.
Kasian Tejapira (Photo by Pattarachai Preechapanich)
Kasian Tejapira, professor of political science at Thammasat University, said all the proposals were basically the same, such as allowing the Senate to elect an interim premier and a cabinet on the basis of Article 7 of the Constitution. This was a violation of the letters and spirit of the constitution and democratic principles.
"The two versions, be it Abhisit's or Surin's, are based on a PDRC mob-engineered political crisis and power vacuum as a result of their illegal obstruction of the [Feb 2] general election," said Mr Kasian.
"In the end, they are similarly positing the crisis, vacuum, and unconstitutional measures as a fait accompli and necessity, so as to ride roughshod over the people's will that should be respected and complied with as expressed in a general election," said Mr Kasian, a core member of the Assembly for the Defence of Democracy.
He said the anti-government forces were dragging what little was left of the Thai constitutional organ of power into an artificial legitimacy based on a wild and willful distortion of some provisions of the constitution.
With the Constitutional Court already widely questioned and discredited in some people's minds, and the Senate soon to join the band wagon, there would not be any acceptable institution left to mediate the conflict peacefully, Mr Kasian warned.
"When you block the will of the people out of a serious political contest, you only have the two opposing sides left to battle things out themselves, be it violently or not.
"One can't suspend electoral democracy for the sake of reform, for the only way to make reform stick and endure is to involve the people in the process through peaceful legal means such as an election," the political scientist said.
Sukhum Nuansakul (file photo)
Sukhum Nuansakul, a political analyst and former rector of Ramkhamhaeng University, said the proposals for reform before elections, or a neutral premiership, were just a step aside from the current constitutional track for one reason only - kicking out the brother (Thaksin) and sister (Yingluck) of the Shinawatra family.
"It's difficult to get away from the current crisis as both sides have their own mass support, but it would be safer for long-term democracy if we stick to the present rules, that caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck would leave if the constitutional mechanisms say so, but not by other extra-unconstitutional ways," said Mr Sukhum.
Zakariya Amataya, SEA Write laureate who has filed a complaint against the Election Commission (EC) for failing to properly organise the Feb 2 election, was frustrated with the prooposals saying it was a backtrack from democracy.
"These proposals are just distortions of rules and regulations for fear of losing in the changing political landscape. It is to serve their own status quo without recognising the active role of the enlightened grassroots and those from non-elite backgrounds," said Mr Zakariya.
Jessada Denduangboripant, Chulalongkorn University assistant professor of science and core leader of a pro-election candle-lighting group, said he agreed that Ms Yingluck and Mr Abhisit should refrain from have political roles and that the cabinet, the government, comprise capable non-elected people to run the country.
"But it's unconceivable to have an unelected person as the prime minister. This would be against the spirit of the May 1992 struggle, in which I participated. I plead with the PDRC not to block the July 20 elections and for the EC to earnestly do their job," said Mr Jessada.
The elected parties should have to sign a social contract, as suggested by Mr Surin, and to undertake needed reforms within a year. But if a charter amendment were needed, it could be done only by referendum, Mr Jessada said.
Thanet Abhornsuvan, Pridi Banomyong International College head of Asean Studies, said if the elite groups want a non-elected leader, the country should go to a referendum on the proposals.
"The current context is different from Oct 14, 1973, when the constitutional players could not function. People therefore did not question the non-elected Sanya Dharmasak premiership, similar to the situation after the May 1991 coup when Anand Panyarachun was the non-elected premier," said Mr Thanet, a historian.
He said democratic and constitutional institutions remain functional, so trying to impose special means would only destroy democracy.
"Let her [Yingluck] be in power, or be stripped of power by the say of traditional institutions like the Constitutional Court, not by others.
"Let the next election present a new set of leaders to preside over reform, which woud include changing the political and electoral rules, not the self-proclaimed reform networks," said Mr Thanet, a former dean of Thammasat University's faculty of liberal arts.