Direct vote for PM: Bad idea says Borwornsak

19 ธันวาคม 2557

The idea that people can directly elect their prime minister and cabinet sounds easy and efficient, but CDC chairman Borwornsak Uwanno gives five reasons why it isn't โ

The idea that people can directly elect their prime minister and cabinet sounds easy and efficient, but CDC chairman Borwornsak Uwanno gives five reasons why it isn't โ€“ and why it could lead to serious protests.

Please join us on our Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/bangkokpostlearning

Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) chairman Borwornsak Uwanno has become the chief critic of the proposal for direct elections of the prime minister and cabinet. APICHIT JINAKUL

It's time to start paying attention to what the people in charge of the writing the new constitution are proposing. How to choose the country's top leaders is a very big issue and it is already becoming somewhat of a controversy. One word you will see in this story is "exacerbate" (to make a situation worse เธ—เธณเนเธซเนเนเธขเนเธฅเธ.) Learn and remember it because you are likely to see it often in the coming debate.

PM poll call too risky, says CDC chairman

Strong-arm exec could face protests

Mongkol Bangprapa

Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) chairman Borwornsak Uwanno has given five key reasons why Thailand should reject the proposal to have the prime minister and cabinet directly elected.

"If we really adopt this system, our country will be the first and only nation to test this system," Mr Borwornsak said.

"If it turns out to work, the one who proposes it deserves to win the Nobel Prize in State Innovation. But if it fails, Thailand and its people will have a high price to pay."

The direct election system for prime minister and cabinet members has been proposed by the National Reform Council's committee on political reform.

Mr Borwornsak's comments are among the strongest to date from the proposal's critics, and could prove influential in swaying members of the charter drafting panel.

The CDC chairman says the proposal will exacerbate conflicts in society if the system is seen as being unfair and harming the opposition's chances of winning an election. Critics who feel frustrated at their ability to challenge the executive and the PM may resort to protests and violence, he said.

Mr Borwornsak described the proposal as a "presidentialised parliamentary system".

He said the proposal could also exacerbate vote buying because in a winner-takes-all system, those who desperately want to win the race will invest a fortune to ensure they do.

As such, the cabinet list will be full of election financiers instead of people qualified to govern the country, said Mr Borwornsak.

He said the proposal would also result in both the PM and the cabinet being extremely strong, because the elected PM could not be replaced except in another election and no cabinet reshuffle would be possible.

Given such power, there is a high risk they will interfere in independent organisations and the media and end up facing protests carried out by those who want to oust them, he said.

A directly elected cabinet would have so much power it could be described as a "super president", he said.

The directly elected PM will obtain the power to approve every financial bill proposed by the MPs.

In a scenario in which a party wins the election for cabinet but fails to gain the majority of seats in parliament, Mr Borwornsak warned that party could try to buy as many MPs it can to support it.

But if the same party wins the cabinet election and also wins a majority of seats in parliament, a parliamentary dictatorship would beckon, he said.

Mr Borwornsak said the direct election of a PM and cabinet system is also likely to come with insufficient mechanisms to keep the government's power in check, such as censure debates.

A proposal to allow a House committee of independent lawyers to pursue legal action against the PM or cabinet ministers for misconduct is similarly unlikely to work, he said.