Chusak and Chonanan highlight that the "20 pick 1" constitutional amendment formula removes citizens' rights to participate in drafting the constitution. They plan to reserve their position and propose amendments, including on the origin of the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), stressing that the public must elect members in a first phase to prevent majority control within parliament.
On 9 Dec 2025 GMT+7, Mr. Chusak Sirinil, Deputy Leader of the Pheu Thai Party and member of the committee reviewing the draft constitutional amendment, said that the key points agreed upon by the majority of the committee are that the new constitution will be drafted by 35 constitution drafters and 35 public consultation members.
The method for selecting these two groups uses what is called the "20 pick 1" formula, meaning that if 20 members of parliament unite, they can select one drafter. For example, a party with 120 members can select six drafters.
Using this formula effectively excludes public participation. The original draft by the People’s Party proposed that 70 members be elected by the public first, then parliament would reduce this to 35. However, the public election was removed out of concern it might conflict with the Constitutional Court's ruling.
"This formula (20 pick 1) has been criticized within the committee because it may allow the parliamentary majority to select drafters for the new constitution, potentially shaping it to their preference. Whoever controls the parliamentary majority can steer the constitution accordingly."
Mr. Chusak stated that, representing the minority committee members of the Pheu Thai Party, they have reserved their position and proposed amendments on two key points.
First, there should be a CDC system, which would establish a dedicated assembly to consider the constitution draft and filter it before submission to parliament.
They propose a CDC model as previously outlined by Pheu Thai in the first reading: 300 members elected by the public, then reduced by parliament to 100, plus 51 appointed from various professional sectors, totaling 151 CDC members.
They believe this method does not violate the Constitutional Court’s ruling because the public would elect members initially, but this would not be considered a direct election of drafters, as parliament would further screen the members.
Second, regarding the selection of the two committees using the "20 pick 1" formula, Mr. Chusak said this could lead to a partisan selection. Therefore, Pheu Thai reserves the right to amend, proposing that the 35 drafters remain, but 10 be appointed experts in relevant fields, and the remaining 25 be selected using a "28 pick 1" formula to balance the committees and increase diversity.
Mr. Chusak emphasized that in the second reading, parliament members must decide which formula to use for selecting the constitution drafters. Currently, the majority favors "20 pick 1," but Pheu Thai proposes amendments to establish a CDC and change the selection method for the two committees.
Dr. Chonanan Srikaew, MP for Nan Province and Pheu Thai member on the constitutional amendment committee, said Pheu Thai’s concerns about amending Article 256 boil down to two main issues.
The first is the origin of the 35 constitution drafters, and the second is the process for considering the new constitution draft. Pheu Thai has reserved and proposed amendments on these to prevent collusion, as whoever controls the parliamentary majority—including the Senate—could dominate the drafting process. The 35 drafters would both draft and review the constitution before submitting it to parliament for approval.
Dr. Chonanan added that if parliament agrees with Pheu Thai's reservations and amendments in the upcoming second reading, it could reduce domination by any single faction.
Pheu Thai is confident that establishing a Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDC) would link the new constitution more closely to the people and enhance legitimacy. The 35 drafters would draft the constitution and submit it to the CDC for detailed review, providing a system of checks and balances.
"Whether this is approved by parliament remains to be seen in the upcoming clause-by-clause review, but Pheu Thai confirms it will vote according to the minority committee’s position, reserving and proposing amendments."
Additionally, Mr. Chusak emphasized that after the second reading, the third reading will occur within 15 days, requiring more than half of parliament's votes, including at least one-third of the Senate’s approval. It is currently uncertain if the draft will pass this third reading. Therefore, he calls on the cabinet to consider holding a referendum on the first question: whether the public wants a new constitution drafted, before submitting it to the Election Commission. This would guarantee that future parliament members follow the public’s decision on whether to draft a new constitution.
Mr. Julpan Amornwiwat, Pheu Thai Party leader, also stressed that holding the first referendum question does not conflict with the ongoing amendment process and that after this process, the cabinet can submit a second referendum question to the Election Commission.
"We call for this first referendum question to assure Thai citizens that after the election, the constitutional amendment process will proceed," Julpan said.
When asked if uncertainty over the constitutional amendment process opening the way for a new draft affects the decision to submit a no-confidence motion against the government, he replied.
Mr. Julpan said that political factors are always changing, including recent floods where the government failed to resolve problems for citizens. These issues have been included in Pheu Thai’s no-confidence motion, along with border conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia. The constitutional amendment issue is a contributing factor but no final decision has been made yet.
Dr. Chonanan added that the no-confidence motion under Article 151 concerning constitutional amendments to allow drafting a new constitution is a significant factor for Pheu Thai. Within two days, they will know whether the direction for the new draft aligns with Pheu Thai’s reservations or the majority committee’s view, which will influence their no-confidence motion consideration.
"If the constitution draft follows the majority committee’s resolution, we foresee the new constitution will be biased towards one side according to the parliamentary majority," he said.
