Birds are flying over the Democracy Monument at dawn. (file photo)
The ruling Thai Contribution Party’s change in direction on its charter amendments regarding ethical standards for politicians has raised questions about whether the government will go ahead with the amendments or stick to its promise to draft a new charter.
The Thai Contribution Party recently introduced a bill in parliament to amend parts of the 2017 Charter, including Article 160, which sets out prerequisites for individuals seeking ministerial positions.
It states that they must be demonstrably honest and have not committed any serious ethical violations.
However, the ruling party’s proposal faced strong opposition within the coalition government, particularly from the Bhumjaithai Party and the United Thai Party (UTN). Contribution of Thailand Party secretary-general Sorawong Thienthong suggested the party was considering removing the bill for further review.
The Bangkok Post spoke with analysts and representatives of various stakeholders to discuss whether the article-by-article amendments would be successful and whether the charter rewriting process could meet interim deadlines.
listen to public opinion
Thai Contributor Party List lawmaker Sutin Krungsan said constitutional amendments needed to take into account the public’s opinion, which was why the party decided to withdraw the amendment bill.
He said the party sees no shame in the move.
Clause-by-clause amendments have been shelved, but the party is instead looking at more comprehensive amendments that would address ethical standards for politicians, he said.
But he said it was difficult to predict how long it would take, especially if the proposal would need to go through multiple referendums.
Sutin said the new charter was unlikely to come into force before the next general election, and it was still possible that the Thai Contribution Party could seek clause-by-clause amendments in the future.
Suchin said the party had originally proposed section-by-section amendments to address urgent issues, as a complete rewrite could take several years.
Asked about criticism that the move was self-serving, he said it was aimed at protecting politicians and ensuring stability.
“Perhaps our coalition partners will come to terms with us in the future and discuss this issue to find common ground. If they see politicians as representatives of the people, “I don’t think they will see it as an entity trying to make a profit.”
Mr. Soutine: Consider public opinion
No section-by-section editing
People’s Party (PP) officials say it is highly unlikely that the Pro-Thailand Party will pursue article-by-article amendments to avoid rifts within the bloc, given the strong resistance from its coalition partners.
Sources said that while it was equally unlikely that the PP’s amendments would be approved by parliament, the party had decided to move forward with efforts to raise awareness about the charter’s flaws.
“We are highlighting this issue because we think there is a problem. None of the 30 members of Congress who face ethical issues support this bill. to show that we are not doing this for ourselves.”
The source was referring to an investigation into the ethical conduct of 44 politicians from the now-disbanded Forward Party (MFP) who supported a bill to amend the lese majeste law. With the MFP disbanded by court order, several people were expelled from politics.
Officials say the charter rewrite is unlikely to be completed within three years, in part because senators believed to be controlled by coalition parties are less likely to support them. He says it’s low.
Last week, following the Thai Contribution Party’s decision to change course, PP-List MP Parit Watcharasindhu said the party would put on hold amendments to its charter provisions on ethical standards for politicians.
He said the party did not want the issue to be used as a pretext for the coalition government to withdraw support for other proposals the party was pushing.
But the opposition has pushed for six other constitutional amendments, including a bill to prevent another military coup, a military reform bill, and a bill to prevent collusion with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). He said he would promote it. government.
not in the public interest
UTN deputy leader and List lawmaker Withaya Keupparadai said the Thai Contribution Party’s six-point proposal had nothing to do with the public interest and could spark new conflicts. He cited his party’s previous efforts to pass a controversial amnesty bill during the Yingluck Shinawatra government, which sparked street protests and led to the 2014 coup.
He said the bill was seen as an attempt to legally cover former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, a move that served politicians’ interests rather than voters’ interests.
“While these issues are likely to spark street protests, the number of people taking to the streets may be smaller.However, this issue is divisive and should not be underestimated. It is expected that petitions will initially be filed with various agencies,” he said.
Mr Witaya said he did not agree with the amendment and would make clear to the party how it was not in the best interests of the country.
The UTN deputy leader said he did not believe the attempt to amend the charter would be successful unless the Thai Contribution Party switched sides and joined the opposition People’s Party, which had earlier introduced a similar bill. He argued that the government should honor the agreement, which calls for rewriting the Charter, with the exception of Chapters 1 and 2.
Mr. Witaya: The problem is dichotomous.
Referendum uncertain
Ahead of the Pro-Thai Party’s U-turn, Nikorn Chamnon, secretary of the House of Commons select committee considering the referendum bill, worries that attempts to revise ethical standards for politicians could complicate rewriting the charter. expressed.
Speaking at a forum organized by the Electoral Commission on September 23, he said the proposed referendum could include proposed changes and that such inclusion would influence voters’ decisions. I warned you that this is a possibility. He also expressed uncertainty about the Senate’s position on the bill, which is scheduled to be scrutinized by the Senate tomorrow.
The House of Commons amended section 13 of the Referendum Act, abolishing the “double majority” rule and replacing it with a single majority. In other words, a referendum only needs more than half of the votes cast to be adopted.
The amendment passed the House of Representatives with an overwhelming 409 votes on August 21 and was sent to the Senate for consideration. Despite some senators expressing opposition, the Senate passed the bill on first reading with a vote of 179 to 5, with three abstentions. But a special Senate committee scrutinizing the bill has recommended reinstating the “dual majority” requirement, and senators are expected to consider the issue tomorrow.
Nikorn said if the Senate votes to reintroduce the double-majority rule, the bill will be held up for six months before being referred back to the House of Commons. The bill could then be passed if MPs reaffirm their support.
He said a six-month wait could delay a referendum scheduled for early February next year and open the door to other charter reform attempts that could increase pressure.
“The fate of the charter rewriting process depends on a referendum scheduled for early February (tentatively February 2nd),” he said.
Nikorn: Bidding can complicate rewriting.
Yuttaporn Isarachai, a political science lecturer at Sukhothai’s Thammatirat Open University, said it would not be surprising if the ruling party did not revive the issue of ethical standards for politicians, especially since the coalition partners are not in agreement.
He said any changes to the charter would require agreement from both houses of Congress and at least 20% support from opposition parties. Unless key coalition members like Mr Bhumjaitai support the move, it’s over.
He said the government needed to negotiate to maintain unity, noting that the compromise reached on cannabis policy was an example of such negotiations to preserve the coalition.
“If the Senate does not agree with the House on a referendum bill, the charter rewriting timeline will be postponed,” Yuttaporn said.
Yuttaphon: “Government must maintain unity”
