After public debate on how many referendums are needed to draft a new Constitution, the Constitutional Court has ruled that three referendums are required, but parliament cannot allow the public to elect a Constituent Assembly.

The Constitutional Court ruled that the House of Representatives does have the power to initiate or express a desire to draft a new constitution, but it must hold a public referendum for the people to approve whether a new constitution should be drafted.

However, parliament will not be able to allow the public to directly elect a Constituent Assembly.

The Constitutional Court also ruled 6-1 in favour of three referendums. The first referendum will ask the public whether a new constitution should be drafted. The second will ask about the drafting method and key content of the new constitution, and the last involves public approval of the draft Constitution.

However, the Court stated that the first and second referendums can be combined into one.

Natchapakorn Nammuang, a member of the Constitution Advocacy Alliance (CALL), which campaigns for constitutional amendments, observed that the Court was not clear in its statement that parliament cannot allow the public to directly elect the Constituent Assembly.

The Court did not clarify whether it refers to provisions that exist in the current constitution or includes possible future amendments to elect a Constituent Assembly. If it includes future amendments, an elected Constituent Assembly will never happen. He noted that this matter should be made clear before moving forward.

The CALL network reaffirmed that a Constituent Assembly must be elected by the public. In addition, he pointed out that a Constituent Assembly was elected by the public during the drafting of the 1997 Constitution. 

Natchapakorn also raised concerns about the questions in the referendums, particularly when the Bhumjaithai Party is leading the government. He stated that it is widely known that the Party has little motivation to amend the constitution, and its Memorandum of Agreement with the People’s Party does not state what Bhumjaithai must ‘achieve’ in constitutional amendments.

He remarked that close attention should be paid to how the referendum questions from the government will be framed, reiterating that they must be straightforward and constructive to convince the public to agree to drafting a new constitution. 

There has been controversy over how many referendums must be held to draft a new constitution. Some believed it required only two, but some said three referendums were required.

Section 256 of the 2017 Constitution stipulates that after a motion to amend the Constitution passes three readings in Parliament, a referendum shall be held before the draft is passed to the King to be signed into law.

However, according to iLaw, the meaning of Section 256 was called into doubt when Paiboon Nititawan, an MP from the Palang Pracharath Party, and former senator Somchai Sawangkarn filed a petition with the Constitutional Court to clarify whether parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution.

Parliament later voted on 17 March to petition the Constitutional Court to rule on Parliament’s authority regarding constitutional amendments.