Abhisit urges NCPO to ‘step back’ on vote

Apart from sharing his views about the charter content, which could determine the country’s future after the upcoming referendum, Abhisit also voices concern on the referendum process, seen as a crucial factor for future peace and order. 

He talked to The Nation’s Piyaporn Wongruang during a recent group interview with Nation Group’s news editors on the newspaper’s 45th anniversary.

 

 AS THE REFERENDUM DRAWS NEAR, PEOPLE HAVE SAID THEY HAVE NOT YET SEEN A CLEAR STANCE FROM THE DEMOCRATS YET. HOW WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THIS?

To declare whether we will or will not accept the new charter is still an open question and it may be too early to do so. In my view, I still think the NCPO has a duty to inform people clearly what other options are there. We also believe the referendum process is not as democratic as it is supposed to be. At this point, people, even the media themselves, are still afraid of saying things.

On the other hand, state mechanisms are taking a leading role in disseminating information, which in my view is very different than international standards and principles of arranging a referendum.

What would happen is this: If the charter passes the referendum, the process will be used as an excuse to reject it later. If it does not pass, the NCPO itself will be pressured to take responsibility for the failure. 

The Democrats do not want to see either of these two scenarios. We want to see a charter pass the referendum with a consensus, and avoid chaos afterwards.

So, I want Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha to step back from where he is a bit. First of all, he should demonstrate clearly that he will give people an alternative to the charter draft, and let the matter be determined by the people, without influencing them by other means.

Secondly, he should pull back all state mechanisms to let the referendum be truly free and fair.

My point is that British Prime Minister David Cameron had to resign after being defeated at the polls. Why? Because he had turned himself from an organiser of the referendum to become a campaigner. The NCPO should not put itself into the same position. If the charter passes, it will become a source of conflict itself as people will say it was passed because of the NCPO’s power. But if it does not, will Prayut resign?

Either way would create a new conflict in society, so the Democrats wish to see the NCPO adjust its position on the matter first.

THE NCPO HAS CHOSEN NOT TO REVEAL ANY ALTERNATIVES TO THE CHARTER FOR NOW, 

POSSIBLY BECAUSE THIS IS A CARD TO BE PLAYED AFTER THE REFERENDUM?

The point is the NCPO is not playing a card – you cannot play a card because you are responsible for the country’s fate. In fact, it is people’s right to know what is at stake before making a crucial decision for their lives. Do you want people to accept the charter and move on? How could you still keep a card hidden? This is not fair to the country as a whole and it’s not healthy for the NCPO’s goal to maintain peace and order.

If you really win in the referendum, how long will people still keep arguing about the poll results and its legitimacy? If that becomes the case, I think it’s a total failure of the NCPO. The country should be past such a conflict by now. We have wasted a lot of time already.

IS THIS BECAUSE THE NCPO WISHES TO SEE THE CHARTER PASS THE REFERENDUM?

All I can say is that is what people have understood. People are feeling like that at the moment.

That’s why I suggest the NCPO step back a bit. The interim charter gives them power to take control, even if the charter is not passed. By taking sides like this, what will happen if people vote down the charter? The NCPO’s power will be challenged tremendously. 

DO YOU THINK THAT IT'S THE NCPO'S INTENTION TO GET THE CHARTER PASSED?

Whether it intends to or not, one thing for sure is that the ongoing referendum process is very unnatural. The NCPO claims that the process is just disseminating information, but do you think that it will just be that when people are being informed? If it’s just that, the NCPO would only read the content to people, but I don’t believe that it will be like that. The government has to explain reasons for the charter to voters, and in doing so, will people really be informed about weaknesses in the charter? You would rather tell voters about all the good things, right? So how can this process be neutral?

IS THIS A CRITICAL POINT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY?

I think it is. When the NCPO first took office, we noticed that we did not have a referendum. I remember that I wrote to warn that without a referendum, the charter would not be legitimate. There would always be some groups opposing the charter, saying it was just a product of the coup. That’s the reason why we need a referendum, which must also be free and fair so that people will accept the result.

Actually, I think our vote is much easier than Brexit. The challenge that we have is that when the charter was first drafted, we did not have public participation, and that’s why the charter faces an additional legitimacy challenge.

I think we have wasted a lot of time already, with 84 or 85 years on the road to democracy and 20 different charters written.

In this atmosphere, do you think many people will think that we will use this charter for a long time without it being amended or torn up again? Nobody has been able to answer that question yet. That’s the reason why the upcoming referendum has become crucial for us all, and it must be proceed correctly.

DO YOU THINK THE PROCESS CAN BE ADJUSTED IN TIME, GIVEN THAT WE HAVE ONLY ABOUT ONE MONTH LEFT?

We really need strong adjustment, adjustment by the NCPO and adjustment of people’s attitudes, to make the referendum free and fair enough for people to accept it.

Considering the period of two years in the office, I think the NCPO listens to criticisms to some extent and has adjusted itself. 

But personally, given PM Prayut’s reaction, I think it may be a bit difficult to discuss this matter. It’s really up to the NCPO’s judgement and assessment, whether or not it will listen this time and adjust what it’s doing.

 

HOW DO YOU FORESEE POLITICS AFTER THE |REFERENDUM THEN?

If the charter passes the referendum, we would move forward to an election as planned in the roadmap. But I really believe that the knots of new problems being created now will generate new conflict in society. We have already had conflict that is still unresolved, and we would have another problem added to it. 

 

WHAT ABOUT YOU AND YOUR PARTY? ARE YOU STILL ITS LEADER?

There are rumours here and there, and I cannot answer any specific one. But what I can say is the Democrat Party is a political party that is based on democratic principles. 

We have certain rules and regulations to follow for the best of the people and the country, and do not stick to a single particular figure. I am still in charge, and doing my best. We are preparing and ready.