A cruel stab in the back?

Ravee: Small parties to petition court
Ravee: Small parties in order to petition court

The fall of the parliament meeting that was supposed to have got settled the uncertainness over the list MEGA-PIXEL calculation method last week left much just for small political celebrations to gripe about.

Even though the lack of quorum that will forced the program to fall apart has been expected, they discovered it hard to tummy when the reality finally hit them.

For a few several weeks, small parties got high hopes thinking the list MP computation formula had been straightened out to give them an edge in the general election.

Nevertheless , observers believe the little parties suffered a knock-out blow upon Aug 15 following the joint sitting associated with MPs and senators convened to election on the calculation concern was stalled for more than an hour until the quorum was met, along with 165 senators plus 200 MPs present.

It came when an election on the organic costs on the election associated with MPs, which governed the list MP computation method, was called about half an hour later on, only 353 had been present, bringing the session to an abrupt finish.

The quorum had fallen short and there was no way the small celebrations could demand a brand new vote since August 15 was the deadline to sort the matter out following five months of arduous deliberation and overview of the legislation.

But there was a catch to having the calculation problem dropped by means of a lapsed deadline. It is now incumbent on parliament in order to revert to the write organic law on elections of MPs prepared by the Selection Commission which have been put on the back burner.

The EC-sponsored draft — which supports dividing people’s votes for list MPs at a vote by 100 — was welcomed by large parties simply because they felt they had little problem impressing voters with their offer of numerous list MP applicants. On the other hand, the 100 divisor would spell doom for small parties which would need to garner in excess of 300, 000 votes to capture a single checklist seat.

The small parties had been banking on the usage of 500 as the divisor, which would have got handed them the far better chance of obtaining list seats.

Earlier, a post-scrutiny vote within parliament saw lawmakers rallying behind the 500 divisor. The small parties thought triumph was within their grasp, only to lose out in the end.

The particular observers said the collapse of the Aug 15 parliamentary conference may not have been so much of a disappointment to the small parties, yet more of an behave of betrayal.

Going back towards the pre-scrutiny vote over the draft organic legislation, embracing the 500 divisor would not have already been possible without a majority of votes, including individuals from the ruling Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP).

The irony was, since the observers pointed out, the particular PPRP has normally stood firmly behind the 100 divisor, saying 500 contradicted the constitution plus logic, as it would certainly require combining the 400 constituency MEGA-PIXEL votes as well find out list seats to be distributed among entitled parties.

The observers said there must have been the motive that drove the big parties to initially opt for the five hundred divisor.

They also noted the adoption of the five hundred divisor came around the time of the last skin debate from July 19-22, when the government was at its most vulnerable.

Sitting on thin ice, cabinet ministers and Excellent Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha faced a no-confidence threat from twenty MPs who were formerly in the PPRP and small parties.

The observers said the question becoming echoed was regardless of whether support for the five hundred divisor by the authorities was intended to be in exchange for an election of confidence through the small parties.

The skin debate concluded with a comfortable government earn.

Based on the observers, if any such support for the five hundred divisor had certainly been pledged as well as the small parties had reciprocated the gesture, the small parties might have only witnessed the particular favour being reneged on through the lack of quorum.

Many senators, PPRP MPs and the primary opposition Pheu Thai Party, which is a devoted supporter of the 100 divisor, stayed away from the Aug 15 joint session.

However , the small parties still have a couple of tricks up their own sleeve.

Ravee Maschamadol, innovator of the New Palang Dharma Party, said they had agreed to petition the Constitutional Court.

If the court agrees to hear the petition plus rules that the usage of 100 in the computation is legitimate, the controversy will be put to rest, he mentioned.

It’s not quite over and out

The political future of Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha now sits in the hands of the Constitutional Court which on Wednesday approved the opposition’s petition seeking its judgment on his eight-year period.

Section 158 of the 2017 constitution says a prime minister may serve up to eight years regardless of whether delete word the two four-year conditions are back-to-back. Nevertheless , opinions are split over when Gen Prayut’s term officially concludes.

Prayut: Unfazed by legal problem

Critics believe their eight years because premier are upward. They argue this ended on August 23 because the clock started on August 24, 2014, when he was hired PM following the hen house he staged in May that year.

While Gen Prayut has 15 times to present his discussion to the court, it is anybody’s guess about when the ruling is going to be issued.

Some say it will not take the 9 judges too long to reach a decision because the dispute deals with a legal element. However , there are those who think the court may need at least 8 weeks to consider the matter before issuing a ruling.

According to former Constitutional Court judge, Jarun Pukditanakul, the issue is not as simple as some might believe because the charter only states that a best minister cannot assist more than eight years.

The charter stops in short supply of saying when the time clock should start, which leaves room for sometimes wild interpretations plus debates, while the problem regarding the prime minister’s term limit can be unprecedented, Mr Jarun said.

There are two some other arguments surrounding Gen Prayut’s tenure, both of which are in their favour.

One claims his term should end in 2027 because he had been appointed prime minister under the 2017 charter in June 2019. As a result, his eight-year limit would end in 2027. The other argues that the count were only available in April 2017 when the current charter has been promulgated, meaning Gen Prayut’s tenure would end in 2025.

In Mr Jarun’s view, the Constitutional Court judges will have to establish the particular intent of the law and examine files related to Section 158 as part of the consideration process.

“The controversy must be resolved as soon as possible to come a political conflict. If it is left pending, it will lead to a new round of political divisiveness and disunity and create damage for that country, ” this individual was quoted as saying.

However , no matter how lengthy the deliberation procedure takes, Deputy Best Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam, the government’s top legal expert, insists the controversy will definitely be over before the Apec 2022 peak in November.

The Constitutional Court unanimously voted to accept Gen Prayut’s tenure case but when it came to choosing whether to suspend him as excellent minister as well, the particular judges appeared divided down the middle. They will voted 5: 4 in favour of suspension impending the ruling, a lot to the delight of the opposition.

In its petition authorized by 171 MPs, the opposition required an injunction to get Gen Prayut to take a break as prime minister pending the court’s ruling.

Opposition plus Pheu Thai Party leader, Cholnan Srikaew, maintained that Style Prayut should stay away from affairs of condition while the court regarded his case.

However , observers say the suspension system does not mean the walls are closing in on Gen Prayut, and many believe the particular court ruling will be in his favour.

The rely on Gen Prayut’s period under Section 158 is tied to just how he came to power, according to those who believe the premier may eventually resume office.

The particular eight-year term restrict applies to an excellent minister who is endorsed by the House of Representatives and therefore must not include time offered before the 2019 common election.

Sutin Klungsang, the main opposition whip and Pheu Thai’s mouthpiece leader, does not take up this idea. He insists Gen Prayut’s time is up plus any argument to the contrary is an excuse to help him extend his grip upon power.

If the Constitutional Court rules in Style Prayut’s favour, it is possible it will not mention whenever his term proves, according to observers.

After all, the opposition’s petition only asks if Gen Prayut can carry on serving as leading, assuming he has already exhausted his optimum eight years. Those people interested to know how long he can serve may have to initiate a new petition.

According to a highly placed source at Government House, the legal problem did not leave Gen Prayut ruffled whenever he met cupboard ministers and requested them to carry on since normal.

It is not the first time he’s faced legal peril that could see your pet ousted. In December 2020, the Constitutional Court unanimously voted to clear him of a turmoil of interest in staying in an army house after his retirement.