The Office of the Ombudsman is being asked to scrutinise the ethical conduct of 21 National Reform Council (NRC) members who have made known their aim to join a vote to decide the draft charter's fate.
In a petition seen as a move to restrain the NRC members who also serve as charter drafters, lawyer Chalermsak Kanchanasirathip said he doesn't think the members should cast their vote on Sept 6.
Mr Chalermsak said the 21 members who serve on the 36-member Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) should refrain from voting to uphold ethical standards and set a reform precedent.
In the event the draft charter is passed and put up for a referendum, the CDC members will have to stay on to draft organic laws and will leave office after a new parliament convenes. The CDC members get paid in the process.
He said this can still raise questions about conflicts of interest even though the coup-appointed CDC members are barred from assuming political office for two years after the new charter takes effect.
"So taking part in the Sept 6 vote means they have vested interests in it," he said.
Mr Chalermsak also asked the Office of the Ombudsman to petition the Constitutional Court to rule on whether the 21 NRC members should take part in the vote.
He lashed out at CDC chairman Borwornsak Uwanno, who is also NRC deputy chairman, for trying to lobby NRC members to accept the draft and threatening to shun future constitution drafting tasks if the NRC votes down the current draft.
Raksagecha Chaechai, secretary general of the Office of the Ombudsman, said the petition has been received although it is unclear if the Ombudsman has the legal authority to consider it.
Paiboon Nititawan, who is among the 21 charter drafters, insisted the NRC members, including those who also wear CDC hats, have the right to vote on the draft charter.
Any attempt to stifle that right is a violation of the current interim constitution. Mr Paiboon added there are no vested gains for NRC members-cum-charter drafters in voting on the draft constitution because the fate of the draft does not rest with the NRC.
In fact, the draft, if approved by the NRC, will be put to a referendum which would decide the draft's fate.
On Monday, Mr Borwornsak called on the people to answer three questions if they vote on the draft charter at a public referendum.
The questions are: Whether the draft charter can address the country's problems; if civil rights and liberties can be improved should the draft be promulgated; and if the draft responds to their demands and expectations for reconciliation and reform.
He was giving a special lecture at a function organised by the Secretariat of the House of Representatives.
The chairman said the draft charter was designed with a built-in transitional period which would last about five years.
He stressed the country needs a transitional period to rid itself of political conflicts and street protests that went on for more than eight years before last year's coup. The transitional period was crucial for reconciliation and reform to bear fruit.
During the five years, reform strategies would be defined, reconciliation would be rolled out and violence could be handled in a timely manner without military intervention through the work of the so-called crisis panel.
Even though the panel faces heavy criticism, it was deemed to suit the current political situation so was introduced as a tool to achieve reform and stem new, violent conflicts, Mr Borwornsak said.