Bangkok: Nikorn Chamnong has raised concerns regarding the feasibility of holding a referendum to amend the constitution according to the Movement of Assembly (MoA) agreement. He highlighted that such a referendum, which requires an elected Constituent Assembly (CLA), is not possible as it violates Section 166 of the Constitution, according to a ruling by the Constitutional Court. Nikorn suggested that the government should allocate a budget for the Election Commission to expedite the relevant legislation and withdraw the three pending constitutional amendment drafts.

According to Thai News Agency, Mr. Nikorn Chamnong, former secretary of the joint committee that considered the draft Referendum Act, addressed the Constitutional Court’s ruling, which requires three referendums for a new people’s constitution, beginning with a public consultation. He emphasized that the drafting of a new constitution should comply with Chapter 15, Amendments to the Constitution. While Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, it cannot directly allow the people to elect the drafters.

Nikorn, who previously chaired the Subcommittee on Public Opinion on the Referendum Amendment to the 2017 Constitution of Thailand, stressed the importance of conducting referendums in accordance with Article 166 of the Constitution. This article mandates that the Cabinet can only request a referendum on issues that do not conflict with the Constitution. He argued that including a referendum question about amending the entire Constitution to allow an elected CLA would violate Article 166, as the current Constitution does not provide for a CLA.

The Constitutional Court’s ruling also clarified that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot directly allow for the election of drafters. Nikorn suggested that a Constituent Assembly might still be possible if elected through a by-election, similar to the 1997 Constitution process. However, any referendum involving a CLA must ensure compliance with the Constitution to avoid serious violations of ethical standards.

Nikorn also warned that posing a referendum question on drafting a new constitution in its entirety could lead to political conflict if it includes amendments to Chapter 1 and Chapter 2, which concern the state and government form and the monarchy, respectively. He argued that these chapters do not present issues warranting amendment and excluding them in the referendum could prevent political unrest.

Lastly, Nikorn pointed out that the Referendum Act Amendment No. 2 is still pending royal signature and publication in the Royal Gazette. He urged coordination with the Election Commission to prepare necessary secondary legislation and emphasized the need for the new Cabinet to allocate a budget for the referendum to ensure a smooth process.