Last year, when the Pheu Thai Party was forming a coalition government, it made a promise to craft a people's charter that would involve an elected charter drafting assembly and a public referendum, but keep the charter in line with Thailand's constitutional monarchy.
Despite being in power for over seven months, efforts to amend the 2017 charter -- seen by some as a remnant of the 2014 coup -- have made no progress.
The first four months of the Pheu Thai government were dedicated to studying the design of a referendum for amending the charter.
Commerce Minister Phumtham Wechayachai oversaw this process, with two sub-committees set up to gauge public opinion on the matter and draw up guidelines for a referendum.
Before the end of 2023, his panel decided that conducting three referenda would be legally safer.
The matter was not forwarded to the cabinet for review until last week after Pheu Thai list-MP Chusak Sirinil in January submitted to parliament a bill to change the constitutional provision governing amendments.
The ruling party argued the MPs possess full authority to amend the charter.
But the bill was not put on the parliamentary agenda because it was deemed an attempt to make way for the production of a new charter, which required a referendum to be held first.
The House then voted to seek the Constitutional Court's ruling on this conflict, and on how many referenda on charter amendment should be held.
In the middle of April, the court rejected the petition, on the ground that it already ruled on the matter and this issue had nothing to do with parliament's scope of power.
The court ruled earlier that a charter rewrite could not proceed unless a referendum was held first.
The court said amending critical areas of the charter or changing the charter in its entirety requires a prior, favourable referendum vote. However, the ruling did not spell out how many referenda are needed.
Nikorn: New charter in 'three years'
The referendum dilemma
Nikorn Chamnong, who heads the sub-panel gathering opinions on the matter, told the Bangkok Post the aim of charter amendment is to democratise the charter without revising Chapters 1& 2.
But opinions vary on the number of referenda needed, with MPs and senators advocating their involvement. So, two sub-panels were established to ensure inclusivity.
Charter amendment requires support from one-third of the Senate and 20% of the opposition camp.
Previous attempts to push for charter amendment during the Prayut administration were dropped following the court's ruling, so the petition asking the court to rule on how many rounds of referenda should be conducted was done to avoid legal ramifications later.
However, now that the court has dismissed the petition, the decision for the referendum has shifted back to the government, said Mr Nikorn, a Chartthaipattana Party list MP.
Once the cabinet endorses the Phumtham panel's recommendations, the issue will be forwarded to the Election Commission which is required to proceed within 90 days, he said.
The cabinet agreed in principle last week with the three-referenda proposal and the proposed question put forward by the Phumtham committee.
The first will ask voters whether they agree with writing a new charter, without changing Chapters 1 and 2.
Chapter 1 defines Thailand as a single, indivisible kingdom with a democratic regime and the King as head of state, while Chapter 2 stipulates sections about royal prerogatives.
If the majority of voters agrees with the charter rewrite, Section 256 will be amended to allow for the drafting of a new charter by a charter drafting assembly, which will be put up for a second referendum.
Once a new charter is produced, the government will hold a third referendum, asking voters to decide whether it should be adopted.
However, Mr Nikorn said the first referendum faces an obstacle due to the "double majority" rule, which requires more than 50% of eligible voters to participate in a referendum.
If the first referendum fails, the charter rewrite process is expected to start all over again by amending the referendum law to abolish the "double majority" rule, he said. That would mean there will be four rounds if the charter rewrite is rejected in the first referendum.
Despite this, he expressed confidence the entire charter rewrite process can be finished before the term of the current House expires in three years.
"The first referendum must be held as soon as possible. Even if the referendum is held under the current law, I think there is a chance of it being adopted if we work hard to make the public understand what benefits the charter rewrite will bring. As far as I'm concerned, the majority wants a new charter," he said.
Mr Nikorn said the first referendum is expected to take place this year or next, with the charter drafting assembly likely to take shape before 2026.
A draft charter is expected to be produced no later than a year after the formation of the charter drafting assembly.
Nutthawut: Govt panels 'redundant'
Delay tactics
Nutthawut Buaprathum, a list-MP of the main opposition Move Forward Party (MFP), said a charter rewrite was included on the policy platforms of several parties in the government and opposition camps.
He said he believes most of these parties have studied the charter amendment process and agreed on three elements: a new charter should be drafted by an elected charter drafting body; the entire 2017 charter should be up for grabs; and a referendum must be held for adopting a new charter.
However, the amendment process has hit a roadblock regarding the referendum issue, prompting the government to set up committees to gather information. The MFP opted not to join these committees, deeming them redundant.
Mr Nutthawut said the committees have come up with a proposal but have not released complete reports, which raises questions about the government's commitment on moving forward with the proposed amendment.
He said the government should release the reports and coordinate with parliament to have the amendment bills placed on the agenda.
"We've said it before that the court's ruling does not prevent the House from reviewing any charter amendments. The government should hold talks with the House Speaker as the House has the authority to put the amendment bill on the agenda," he said. He said he doubts the government will heed his suggestion, saying it remains to be seen if it has the political will to push ahead.
The new charter could be enforced in 2027 before the next general election if the process starts soon enough, he said.
"If the process isn't initiated this year, the new charter may not come to fruition within the current House. We really don't know how the political landscape will have changed. This is a test of the government's political will," he said.