Senate Speaker Prasopsuk Boondej has voiced support for Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's suggestion for former constitution drafters and academics to be recruited to vet the proposed six-point rewrite of the charter.
Mr Prasopsuk said the participation of the former members of two constitution drafting assemblies would ensure public input in the charter rewrite process.
He said the charter amendments could be completed within a few months if the government was serious about it.
A special parliamentary meeting could then be convened to screen the amendments when the House goes into recess in November, he said.
However, the speaker said it would be time-consuming if the amended constitution was put up for a referendum.There is no law governing a referendum on a new charter.
He said legislation could be sped up and completed within two months if the public wanted a referendum.
On Sunday, Mr Abhisit floated the idea of forming a fresh constitution drafting assembly to handle changes to the charter and the holding of a referendum.
He said the assembly should be made up of members of parliament, those who drew up the 1997 and present 2007 constitutions, scholars and experts.
Government chief whip Chinnaworn Boonyakiat said the government whips would discuss charter amendments with the opposition and the senate whips tomorrow to reach an agreement before Mr Abhisit's return from overseas.
He said the charter rewrite should not take more than six months.
But Puea Thai Party MP Surapong Towihcakchaikul yesterday shot down the prime minister's proposed new charter drafting assembly suggestion.
He said the party would support only the six points offered by the charter reform and national reconciliation committee.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Govt at odds with Senate over loan bill
A legal battle is brewing between the two houses of parliament that could hold up the government's efforts to borrow 400 billion baht to pay for its economic stimulus schemes.
The Senate has demanded that it be allowed to scrutinise a bill on the loans,but the government insists the Senate only has to be informed about the bill.
A majority of senators yesterday voted to support a special committee's recommendation that the Senate be allowed to vet the bill.
The government wanted the Senate to be informed about the bill but did not ask for it to be vetted.
The Senate plans to ask the Constitution Court to rule on whether the bill would be constitutional if the government does not give it to the upper house for scrutiny or to change some details.
Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij yesterday said the government had consulted the Council of State as to whether the Senate could vet the bill and make changes. The council ruled the Senate could not do so because it would be a violation of Article 171 of the constitution.
If the Senate insisted on approaching the Constitution Court, the government would lodge its own complaint with the court against the authority of the Senate,Mr Korn said.
If the Constitution Court blocks parliament's approval of the bill, the government will be unable to access the 400 billion baht in loans that it needs to stimulate the economy.
Mr Korn said the government really needed the bill to be passed into law to provide funding for the "Thailand: Investing from Strength to Strength" stimulus scheme and for investment in the private sector.
He insisted the government would spend the 400 billion baht with transparency and in the best interest of the public. He expected the funds to be disbursed early next year.
The Senate has demanded that it be allowed to scrutinise a bill on the loans,but the government insists the Senate only has to be informed about the bill.
A majority of senators yesterday voted to support a special committee's recommendation that the Senate be allowed to vet the bill.
The government wanted the Senate to be informed about the bill but did not ask for it to be vetted.
The Senate plans to ask the Constitution Court to rule on whether the bill would be constitutional if the government does not give it to the upper house for scrutiny or to change some details.
Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij yesterday said the government had consulted the Council of State as to whether the Senate could vet the bill and make changes. The council ruled the Senate could not do so because it would be a violation of Article 171 of the constitution.
If the Senate insisted on approaching the Constitution Court, the government would lodge its own complaint with the court against the authority of the Senate,Mr Korn said.
If the Constitution Court blocks parliament's approval of the bill, the government will be unable to access the 400 billion baht in loans that it needs to stimulate the economy.
Mr Korn said the government really needed the bill to be passed into law to provide funding for the "Thailand: Investing from Strength to Strength" stimulus scheme and for investment in the private sector.
He insisted the government would spend the 400 billion baht with transparency and in the best interest of the public. He expected the funds to be disbursed early next year.
Senate scrutiny for stimulus plan
The Senate yesterday voted to insert a key clause requiring parliamentary scrutiny of the government's plan to spend Bt400 billion to revitalise the economy.
The vote is seen as a snub to the government, which wants to treat the package as an off-the-budget measure to avoid scrutiny by citing an urgency to fight the economic downturn.
Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij returned from London early to defend authorising the public debt, but failed to convince the upper chamber to approve the House-version of the bill allowing the spending to proceed without scrutiny.
"The government has deemed it necessary to quickly inject funds into the economy, hence the reason to cut short the parliamentary vetting process to just an acknowledgement of the spendings," he said.
Korn later added that after consulting legal authorities, including the Council of State, he found out that it was legal, constitutional and appropriate to exclude the vetting for off-the-budget spendings.
Since the funds were not part of the national budget, the legislative meddling might be construed as unconstitutional because it transgresses on executive power, he warned, prompting fiery protests from several Senators.
Senator Kamnoon Sithisaman said he was preparing to seek a Constitution Court review on the leeway to authorise spending plans without parliamentary scrutiny.
Kamnoon's colleagues, including Manoch Kraiwong and Tuang Antachai, said the Senate would not bow to pressure from the finance minister.
Though Korn apologised for his remarks about transgression on executive power, the upper chamber insisted on its version of the bill by the majority of 51-to-34 votes.
The Senate meeting last night approved the third reading of bill by a majority of 76-to-6 votes.
The vote is seen as a snub to the government, which wants to treat the package as an off-the-budget measure to avoid scrutiny by citing an urgency to fight the economic downturn.
Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij returned from London early to defend authorising the public debt, but failed to convince the upper chamber to approve the House-version of the bill allowing the spending to proceed without scrutiny.
"The government has deemed it necessary to quickly inject funds into the economy, hence the reason to cut short the parliamentary vetting process to just an acknowledgement of the spendings," he said.
Korn later added that after consulting legal authorities, including the Council of State, he found out that it was legal, constitutional and appropriate to exclude the vetting for off-the-budget spendings.
Since the funds were not part of the national budget, the legislative meddling might be construed as unconstitutional because it transgresses on executive power, he warned, prompting fiery protests from several Senators.
Senator Kamnoon Sithisaman said he was preparing to seek a Constitution Court review on the leeway to authorise spending plans without parliamentary scrutiny.
Kamnoon's colleagues, including Manoch Kraiwong and Tuang Antachai, said the Senate would not bow to pressure from the finance minister.
Though Korn apologised for his remarks about transgression on executive power, the upper chamber insisted on its version of the bill by the majority of 51-to-34 votes.
The Senate meeting last night approved the third reading of bill by a majority of 76-to-6 votes.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Senators want independent panel to vet amendments
A group of senators is calling on Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to set up an independent committee to vet issues slated for constitutional amendment which could have far-reaching political implications.
Their call for a 40-member independent panel made up of people from different sectors of society came yesterday as the joint sitting of the House of Representatives and Senate wrapped up its debate on the proposed six-point charter amendment.
The proposed amendments deal with the selection of MPs and senators, a requirement for parliament to approve international contracts, the dissolution of political parties, and MPs' intervention in the administration and budgeting of government projects.
Critics see the proposed changes as an attempt by politicians to change the rules to serve their own purposes.
The government whip is also considering an idea to form a new constitution drafting assembly to take charge of the charter rewrite after the joint sitting ended.
Senator Paiboon Nititawam said the six-point proposal by the joint committee on national reconciliation and consti-tutional amendments needed a review because it lacked public input.
He suggested the prime minister appoint a 40-member panel to study the six-point proposal and find out what else should be amended. Their conclusion should go before a hearing.
Mr Paiboon said the proposed independent committee was not the same as a new constitution drafting assembly,and the prime minister should consider his group's idea as an alternative.
However, Mr Paiboon said he was also keen on the idea to have a fresh assembly to rewrite the charter but noted that all proposed amendments should be put to a referendum.
Opposition MPs yesterday poured scorn on the government whip's suggestion that a new assembly be formed.
Puea Thai Party MP for Chiang Mai Surapong Towijakchaikul said the proposal was just a government attempt to buy time and prolong its stay in power.
Opposition chief whip Witthaya Buranasiri also disagreed with the proposal, saying amending the charter was part of the work of MPs and senators."What are we doing here if we don't do the job?" Mr Witthaya asked.
"The people have elected us. Why shouldn't we use the mandate?"
Their call for a 40-member independent panel made up of people from different sectors of society came yesterday as the joint sitting of the House of Representatives and Senate wrapped up its debate on the proposed six-point charter amendment.
The proposed amendments deal with the selection of MPs and senators, a requirement for parliament to approve international contracts, the dissolution of political parties, and MPs' intervention in the administration and budgeting of government projects.
Critics see the proposed changes as an attempt by politicians to change the rules to serve their own purposes.
The government whip is also considering an idea to form a new constitution drafting assembly to take charge of the charter rewrite after the joint sitting ended.
Senator Paiboon Nititawam said the six-point proposal by the joint committee on national reconciliation and consti-tutional amendments needed a review because it lacked public input.
He suggested the prime minister appoint a 40-member panel to study the six-point proposal and find out what else should be amended. Their conclusion should go before a hearing.
Mr Paiboon said the proposed independent committee was not the same as a new constitution drafting assembly,and the prime minister should consider his group's idea as an alternative.
However, Mr Paiboon said he was also keen on the idea to have a fresh assembly to rewrite the charter but noted that all proposed amendments should be put to a referendum.
Opposition MPs yesterday poured scorn on the government whip's suggestion that a new assembly be formed.
Puea Thai Party MP for Chiang Mai Surapong Towijakchaikul said the proposal was just a government attempt to buy time and prolong its stay in power.
Opposition chief whip Witthaya Buranasiri also disagreed with the proposal, saying amending the charter was part of the work of MPs and senators."What are we doing here if we don't do the job?" Mr Witthaya asked.
"The people have elected us. Why shouldn't we use the mandate?"
Friday, September 18, 2009
"Self-serving" charter changes draw fire
The joint sitting of parliament on proposed charter amendments has begun on an acrimonious note with politicians accused of trying to change the rules to serve their own purposes.
Senator Rosana Tositrakul yesterday told the session the constitutional changes proposed by the Senate-House joint committee on national reconciliation and constitutional amendments were intended only to protect the interests of politicians in power.
"The proposed amendments to six points of the constitution have resulted from politicians being intent on solving their own problems," the senator said.
"This constitution offers the public considerable rights and liberties but there are still very many problems in enforcement. I don't see any representatives or the government trying to solve the problems to really provide the public with the constitutional rights they deserve."
Mrs Rosana said politicians were unlikely to push for solutions that might threaten their own or their cronies'interests.
The joint sitting came about after Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva requested a debate on constitutional amendment proposals without a vote.
The changes being proposed would affect the selection of MPs and senators,the requirement for parliament to approve international contracts, the dissolution of political partes, and MPs'intervention in the administration and budgeting of government projects.
Democrat Party MP Niphon Wisityuthasart said he disagreed with the return to a single-constituency election system because it would encourage more vote buying.
Opposition Puea Thai Party MP Thitima Chaisaeng called for the amendment of Article 237 which she said made the disbanding of parties for minor offences too easy.
Puea Thai MP Chaiya Promma said the government should drop plans to set up a constitution drafting assembly to consider charter changes, which were just a bid to buy time.
The joint houses debate ends today.
The public is split on whether to modify the constitution, according to a national survey conducted by a US think-tank.
Only a third of the 1,500 people interviewed by Asia Foundation in June and July in 26 provinces said they were confident the country was moving in the right direction, according to Tim Meisburger, the foundation's director of elections and political processes.
Reasons for the generally pessimistic view included the economic slump and continuing political conflicts.
It is Asia Foundation's first national survey of Thai voters conducted through face-to-face interviews with a random representative sample from all regions except the deep South.
A survey in the South would be conducted later this year, he said.
The survey also revealed the public was evenly split between those who believed charter change would reduce conflicts in the country and those who thought it might exacerbate them.
The survey also revealed support for changes through a participatory process and for the amendments to be put to a national referendum.
Senator Rosana Tositrakul yesterday told the session the constitutional changes proposed by the Senate-House joint committee on national reconciliation and constitutional amendments were intended only to protect the interests of politicians in power.
"The proposed amendments to six points of the constitution have resulted from politicians being intent on solving their own problems," the senator said.
"This constitution offers the public considerable rights and liberties but there are still very many problems in enforcement. I don't see any representatives or the government trying to solve the problems to really provide the public with the constitutional rights they deserve."
Mrs Rosana said politicians were unlikely to push for solutions that might threaten their own or their cronies'interests.
The joint sitting came about after Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva requested a debate on constitutional amendment proposals without a vote.
The changes being proposed would affect the selection of MPs and senators,the requirement for parliament to approve international contracts, the dissolution of political partes, and MPs'intervention in the administration and budgeting of government projects.
Democrat Party MP Niphon Wisityuthasart said he disagreed with the return to a single-constituency election system because it would encourage more vote buying.
Opposition Puea Thai Party MP Thitima Chaisaeng called for the amendment of Article 237 which she said made the disbanding of parties for minor offences too easy.
Puea Thai MP Chaiya Promma said the government should drop plans to set up a constitution drafting assembly to consider charter changes, which were just a bid to buy time.
The joint houses debate ends today.
The public is split on whether to modify the constitution, according to a national survey conducted by a US think-tank.
Only a third of the 1,500 people interviewed by Asia Foundation in June and July in 26 provinces said they were confident the country was moving in the right direction, according to Tim Meisburger, the foundation's director of elections and political processes.
Reasons for the generally pessimistic view included the economic slump and continuing political conflicts.
It is Asia Foundation's first national survey of Thai voters conducted through face-to-face interviews with a random representative sample from all regions except the deep South.
A survey in the South would be conducted later this year, he said.
The survey also revealed the public was evenly split between those who believed charter change would reduce conflicts in the country and those who thought it might exacerbate them.
The survey also revealed support for changes through a participatory process and for the amendments to be put to a national referendum.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Abhisit comes under attack over PTT energy project
Senator Ruengkrai Leekitwattana has asked the Election Commission to investigate possible constitutional violations by the prime minister for seeking cabinet endorsement for a planned PTT Plc investment in an energy substitution programme.
The senator believes Abhisit Vejjajiva's direction and the cabinet's endorsement of the 113.8 billion baht investment on May 6,2009, is in breach of Articles 266 and 268 of the constitution.
The articles prohibit the prime minister and the cabinet from interfering in the operations of a state enterprise or an enterprise in which the state has a major shareholding.
The investment comes under the government's second economic stimulus package.
Mr Ruengkrai said although the Administrative Court ruled on Dec 14,2007,that PTT Plc was no longer a state com-pany, but a private organisation under the public company law, the Finance Ministry still held more than 50% of the company's shares.
Cabinet approval for PTT to invest more than 100 billion baht was a violation of the constitution, the senator said in a letter to Election Commission chairman Apichart Sukhagganond.
Mr Ruengkrai and Senator Paiboon Samsiripong complained during the upper house debate yesterday on the 2010 budget bill that the government did not even have the good manners to send a cabinet minister to attend the session.
They said the government should not take the Senate for granted and assume it would rubber stamp the bill.
Other senators criticised the bill for duplicating spending plans and were not convinced it would live up to government claims that it would significantly benefit the public.
The senator believes Abhisit Vejjajiva's direction and the cabinet's endorsement of the 113.8 billion baht investment on May 6,2009, is in breach of Articles 266 and 268 of the constitution.
The articles prohibit the prime minister and the cabinet from interfering in the operations of a state enterprise or an enterprise in which the state has a major shareholding.
The investment comes under the government's second economic stimulus package.
Mr Ruengkrai said although the Administrative Court ruled on Dec 14,2007,that PTT Plc was no longer a state com-pany, but a private organisation under the public company law, the Finance Ministry still held more than 50% of the company's shares.
Cabinet approval for PTT to invest more than 100 billion baht was a violation of the constitution, the senator said in a letter to Election Commission chairman Apichart Sukhagganond.
Mr Ruengkrai and Senator Paiboon Samsiripong complained during the upper house debate yesterday on the 2010 budget bill that the government did not even have the good manners to send a cabinet minister to attend the session.
They said the government should not take the Senate for granted and assume it would rubber stamp the bill.
Other senators criticised the bill for duplicating spending plans and were not convinced it would live up to government claims that it would significantly benefit the public.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Charter debate ruled in the public interest
The prime minister has the right under the constitution to ask parliament to debate amendments to the charter, the Council of State says.
Khunying Porntip Jala, secretarygeneral to the council which is the government's legal arm, told the cabinet yesterday Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva could seek the debate in the parliament because it was aimed at the public interest.
Deputy government spokesman Vachara Kannikar said Mr Abhisit was concerned about whether his proposal for the debate violated Article 122 of the constitution. The article requires members of parliament to work in the public interest and be free of conflict of interest.
His call for a parliamentary session to debate the charter amendments,some of which cover political issues,could be in breach of the constitution.
Khunying Porntip was quoted as saying the proposal did not imply any individual interest or a conflict of interest but concerned the public interest.
After hearing the ruling, the cabinet approved Mr Abhisit's call for a joint meeting of the two houses to debate the constitutional amendments without a vote on Sept 16-18.
Mr Abhisit yesterday said it was time to discuss the proposals finalised by the Senate-House joint committee on national reconciliation and constitutional amendments.
MPs and senators are entitled to a joint session to discuss their differences because of the diversity of opinions over the amendments. Those who had proposed them would have the chance to explain their positions, he said.
Mr Abhisit said MPs seemed to be in agreement with an amendment to Article 190 of the 2007 constitution con-cerning parliamentary approval for international contracts.
But they are split on proposed amendments that concern controls on conflicts of interest among MPs and senators.
They are also divided on the need to hold a referendum on proposed amendments and on establishing another constitution-drafting assembly.
Parliament Speaker Chai Chidchob of the Bhumjaithai Party said he had set the joint parliamentary session for Sept 16-18 to allow enough time to thoroughly debate the proposals.
People's Alliance for Democracy coleader Sondhi Limthongkul said the PAD would gather the signatures of 20,000 people to impeach the MPs and senators who proposed the constitutional amendments.
Co-PAD leaders Pibhop Dhongchai and Somsak Kosaisuk said the 2007 constitution was created to check corrupt politicians while the proposed amendments were obviously aimed at their interests.
Khunying Porntip Jala, secretarygeneral to the council which is the government's legal arm, told the cabinet yesterday Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva could seek the debate in the parliament because it was aimed at the public interest.
Deputy government spokesman Vachara Kannikar said Mr Abhisit was concerned about whether his proposal for the debate violated Article 122 of the constitution. The article requires members of parliament to work in the public interest and be free of conflict of interest.
His call for a parliamentary session to debate the charter amendments,some of which cover political issues,could be in breach of the constitution.
Khunying Porntip was quoted as saying the proposal did not imply any individual interest or a conflict of interest but concerned the public interest.
After hearing the ruling, the cabinet approved Mr Abhisit's call for a joint meeting of the two houses to debate the constitutional amendments without a vote on Sept 16-18.
Mr Abhisit yesterday said it was time to discuss the proposals finalised by the Senate-House joint committee on national reconciliation and constitutional amendments.
MPs and senators are entitled to a joint session to discuss their differences because of the diversity of opinions over the amendments. Those who had proposed them would have the chance to explain their positions, he said.
Mr Abhisit said MPs seemed to be in agreement with an amendment to Article 190 of the 2007 constitution con-cerning parliamentary approval for international contracts.
But they are split on proposed amendments that concern controls on conflicts of interest among MPs and senators.
They are also divided on the need to hold a referendum on proposed amendments and on establishing another constitution-drafting assembly.
Parliament Speaker Chai Chidchob of the Bhumjaithai Party said he had set the joint parliamentary session for Sept 16-18 to allow enough time to thoroughly debate the proposals.
People's Alliance for Democracy coleader Sondhi Limthongkul said the PAD would gather the signatures of 20,000 people to impeach the MPs and senators who proposed the constitutional amendments.
Co-PAD leaders Pibhop Dhongchai and Somsak Kosaisuk said the 2007 constitution was created to check corrupt politicians while the proposed amendments were obviously aimed at their interests.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
CHARTER REWRITE SET FOR DEBATE
The Cabinet is expected to approve a motion tomorrow to convene the joint House-Senate session for a genral debate geared for charter amendments, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday.
"The joint session is seen as necessary to form a decision on how to proceed with the charter rewrite," he said.
Abhisit said he expected the lawmakers to deliberate issues in one session before voting on the process to bring about the draft amendments.
He dismissed speculation his main coalition party had done an about-turn by supporting the rewrite, saying the Democrats had never opposed amending the charter. The only precondition was th erewrite should serve the public and not vested interests, he said.
Following the Cabinet's approval of the government-sponsored motion, he said he would coordinate with Parliament President Chai Chidchob to schedule the joint session and its format for debate.
Abhisit said the upcoming debate on a charter rewrite should not be linked to the issue of amnesty for political offences.
The charter rewrite is expected to focus on six issues designed to improve the political system, according to the reconciliation panel's report, he said.
Critics should not act in haste to condemn the rewrite before studying the proposed amendments, he said, arguing the rewrite of Article 190 for framing international agreements is not designed for the gain of political parties.
He said the debate on charter amendments was deemed appropriate at this juncture because the government had already devoted sufficient attention to fighting economic woes.
He warned against speculating whether the charter rewrite would quicken House dissolution. It still remains unclear whether or not the lawmakers will impose tranisitional clauses in order to delay the promulgation of revised provisions, he said.
If there is a transitional clause, as happened in past amendments, then there is no linkage between the charter rewrite and a snap election, he added.
The Democrat Party has agreed to convene the parliamentary session to debate the process for charter rewrite, its deputy spokesman Warong Dejkitwikrom said.
After a preliminary review, the main coalition party has voiced support to amend two provisions related to the framing of international agreements and the revision from multi-seat to single-seat constituencies.
He said his party might agree to the holding of a public hearing or a referendum on the draft amendments - if the public and the majority of lawmakers approved.
Pheu Thai Party deputy leader Plodprasop Suraswadi called for a speedy process to amend the charter.
"The deepening social divisions can be attributed to the Constitution and the problem will degenerate beyond rehabilitation without the timely action to rectify the flaws," he said.
Plodprasop voiced optimism that the House and the Senate had sufficient votes to push for charter amendments. He claimed 188 opposition MPs and 170 coalition lawmakers and senators were in favour of rewriting the charter. A minimum number for the passage of a charter amendment is 324 votes.
Former charter writer Seri Suwannapanont said he suspected a conflict of interest if MPs and senators were the main driving force for the charter rewrite. Seri reminded lawmakers they might face impeachment proceedings in case the amendments were designed for self-serving gains.
Peopel's Alliance for Democracy spokesman Suriyasai Katasila warned the charter amendments might deepen the turbulence instead of resolving it.
"The joint session is seen as necessary to form a decision on how to proceed with the charter rewrite," he said.
Abhisit said he expected the lawmakers to deliberate issues in one session before voting on the process to bring about the draft amendments.
He dismissed speculation his main coalition party had done an about-turn by supporting the rewrite, saying the Democrats had never opposed amending the charter. The only precondition was th erewrite should serve the public and not vested interests, he said.
Following the Cabinet's approval of the government-sponsored motion, he said he would coordinate with Parliament President Chai Chidchob to schedule the joint session and its format for debate.
Abhisit said the upcoming debate on a charter rewrite should not be linked to the issue of amnesty for political offences.
The charter rewrite is expected to focus on six issues designed to improve the political system, according to the reconciliation panel's report, he said.
Critics should not act in haste to condemn the rewrite before studying the proposed amendments, he said, arguing the rewrite of Article 190 for framing international agreements is not designed for the gain of political parties.
He said the debate on charter amendments was deemed appropriate at this juncture because the government had already devoted sufficient attention to fighting economic woes.
He warned against speculating whether the charter rewrite would quicken House dissolution. It still remains unclear whether or not the lawmakers will impose tranisitional clauses in order to delay the promulgation of revised provisions, he said.
If there is a transitional clause, as happened in past amendments, then there is no linkage between the charter rewrite and a snap election, he added.
The Democrat Party has agreed to convene the parliamentary session to debate the process for charter rewrite, its deputy spokesman Warong Dejkitwikrom said.
After a preliminary review, the main coalition party has voiced support to amend two provisions related to the framing of international agreements and the revision from multi-seat to single-seat constituencies.
He said his party might agree to the holding of a public hearing or a referendum on the draft amendments - if the public and the majority of lawmakers approved.
Pheu Thai Party deputy leader Plodprasop Suraswadi called for a speedy process to amend the charter.
"The deepening social divisions can be attributed to the Constitution and the problem will degenerate beyond rehabilitation without the timely action to rectify the flaws," he said.
Plodprasop voiced optimism that the House and the Senate had sufficient votes to push for charter amendments. He claimed 188 opposition MPs and 170 coalition lawmakers and senators were in favour of rewriting the charter. A minimum number for the passage of a charter amendment is 324 votes.
Former charter writer Seri Suwannapanont said he suspected a conflict of interest if MPs and senators were the main driving force for the charter rewrite. Seri reminded lawmakers they might face impeachment proceedings in case the amendments were designed for self-serving gains.
Peopel's Alliance for Democracy spokesman Suriyasai Katasila warned the charter amendments might deepen the turbulence instead of resolving it.
Friday, September 4, 2009
EC appoints panel to look into conduct of Prasobsuk
The Election Commission has appointed a committee to investigate the senate speaker over claims he failed to seek a ruling from the Constitution Court on the qualifications of 16 senators accused of violating the shareholding law.
The law required Prasobsuk Boondej to seek the court ruling on the senators'qualifications within 30 days.
EC secretary-general Suthiphon Thaveechaiyagarn yesterday said Mr Prasobsuk did not seek the ruling.
Mr Suthiphon said the EC had asked its litigation team to look into Mr Prasobsuk's actions after it received a complaint from appointed senator Ruangkrai Le-
kijwattana.
Mr Ruangkrai asked the EC to probe whether Mr Prasobsuk had violated Article 266(1)of the charter.
Mr Prasobsuk's alleged failure meant the EC was unable to vet the Suthiphon: Litigation qualifications of team to probe actions the senators.
The EC also set up a subcommittee yesterday to look into the facts of the case and their legal implications. The subcommittee was expected to report back to the commission within 30 days.
The Constitution Court would eventually decide if the Senate speaker should be removed from office if it was found he violated the constitution.
Mr Prasobsuk yesterday said he had not neglected his duties nor helped his fellow senators evade justice.
He said the EC had no right to investigate his conduct, but he would cooperate with it if it invited him to appear before it to answer questions.
Mr Suthiphon said the EC had sent its decision to ban 13 MPs who allegedly hold stakes in state concessionaires to House Speaker Chai Chidchob.
Mr Chai would pass the decision to the Constitution Court which had the final authority to rule if the MPs should be stripped of their seats.
The law required Prasobsuk Boondej to seek the court ruling on the senators'qualifications within 30 days.
EC secretary-general Suthiphon Thaveechaiyagarn yesterday said Mr Prasobsuk did not seek the ruling.
Mr Suthiphon said the EC had asked its litigation team to look into Mr Prasobsuk's actions after it received a complaint from appointed senator Ruangkrai Le-
kijwattana.
Mr Ruangkrai asked the EC to probe whether Mr Prasobsuk had violated Article 266(1)of the charter.
Mr Prasobsuk's alleged failure meant the EC was unable to vet the Suthiphon: Litigation qualifications of team to probe actions the senators.
The EC also set up a subcommittee yesterday to look into the facts of the case and their legal implications. The subcommittee was expected to report back to the commission within 30 days.
The Constitution Court would eventually decide if the Senate speaker should be removed from office if it was found he violated the constitution.
Mr Prasobsuk yesterday said he had not neglected his duties nor helped his fellow senators evade justice.
He said the EC had no right to investigate his conduct, but he would cooperate with it if it invited him to appear before it to answer questions.
Mr Suthiphon said the EC had sent its decision to ban 13 MPs who allegedly hold stakes in state concessionaires to House Speaker Chai Chidchob.
Mr Chai would pass the decision to the Constitution Court which had the final authority to rule if the MPs should be stripped of their seats.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)