Rip up the constitution? If the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) is more powerful than the charter, what is the point of having the highest law?
The person who suggested the constitution is rubbish is Deputy Prime Minister Gen Prawit Wongsuwon. When asked about growing anti-military protests, the deputy premier said people can rally as long as they conform to the law and the NCPO's order.
"We are the sovereign authority. What is the problem now?" Gen Prawit declared.
Atiya Achakulwisut is a columnist, Bangkok Post.
The problems are many. If sovereignty does belong to the military regime as the DPM embroiled in a luxury watches scandal seems to have understood, what use is the 2017 charter?
It took two years for this supreme law to be drafted, at the behest of the military regime itself. The charter was also put to a national referendum, in which it was approved by more than 15 million votes -- 61% out of a 59% turnout.
The charter was promulgated last April. Though it maintained Section 44 of the provisional charter, which gives the NCPO power to overrule the legislative, executive and judicial branches, the highest law does not stipulate that the regime, which ousted the democratically elected Pheu Thai government by force, is the sovereign authority.
If DPM Gen Prawit were a little more careful -- had he studied the constitution or learnt from his past loose-tongued mistakes -- he could have avoided making yet another painful gaffe.
But, of course, the DPM does not seem to have time to do so despite his many watches. That's why he keeps generating a long string of controversies that are now threatening his status as the regime's second-in-command.
Gen Prawit's latest remark, arrogant and out of place as it is, added a heap of disdain on top of the criticism he has received for his unclear explanation about the 25 luxury watches he has been seen wearing but failed to declare to the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
A thin-skinned politician would have bowed out under such enormous pressure. But not the "Rolex General". Apparently feeling unappreciated for his "50 years of dedication to the country", the DPM made it known during a get-together with military-beat reporters last week that he would be willing to resign if the public no longer want his service.
It was not his day, and has not been lately. Right after his plea, online outlets set up unofficial polls asking netizens whether they wanted Gen Prawit to remain in the government. So far, responses have been overwhelmingly against, with more than 90% of people saying the embattled DPM should resign.
At the same time, a petition for Gen Prawit's resignation on the online platform change.org attracted more than 40,000 signatures.
At this point, whether Gen Prawit will leave the government or try to hang on until the bitter end does not mean much. The DPM has been so damaged there is no prospect for him in the future except disgrace.
What could end up as the greatest irony is that his "sovereignty" remark, which was surely meant to intimidate pro-election protesters, could end up empowering them.
Probably blinded by the regime's increasing tendency to resort to dictatorial rule, DPM Gen Prawit fails to understand why the charter was needed in the first place. It is a social contract to ensure the peaceful coexistence between the governor and governed. It's an agreement that guarantees his government will not be treated as a tyrant.
And if Gen Prawit cared to study the highest law, he would have realised it stipulates in Section 3 in clear, unequivocal fashion: Sovereignty belongs to the Thai people.
If the Rolex General had time to look up from his expensive watches, he might have seen in the next section that human dignity, rights, liberty and equality are also protected.
Or he could just read the preamble. It states that the charter has been written to establish strict mechanisms to prevent, verify and eradicate corruption and malpractice to ensure that a government that lacks morality, ethics and good governance will not attain administrative power or use it by whim.
A luxury watch may carry the moniker "Perpetual" but that is never the case with dictatorial power. Gen Prawit might feel comfortable borrowing expensive timepieces from friends but he cannot claim ownership over something like "sovereignty" which belongs to all Thais.
Or else he must rip up the constitution, again.
