The law act organization has reached its climax, and it is expected to diminish away from this point, according to one political scientist.
The campaign by the ruling Pheu Thai Party and the main opposition People’s Party ( PP ) to push for wholesale changes to the constitution was predicted to fail from the outset after the Constitutional Court ruled that multiple referendums were a prerequisite to a successful charter rewrite.
That is where issues turned quite complicated, the researcher pointed out.
For starters, for a vote to been adopted, a dual majority rule– where more than 50 % of voters may participate in the referendum, and the majority of those who cast their votes may endorse it– applies.
The guideline presents a formidable obstacle despite a continuous force by Pheu Thai and PP to water it down by seeking to replace it with a single lot requirement, which just requires a simple majority from voters for a referendum to get passed.
But a change to one majority would involve rejigging the referendum law, which brought about another complication with the Senate strongly in favour of retaining the twin majority, a stand backed by Bhumjaithai, the second-largest coalition party.
A majority of senators and Bhumjaithai argued that a thorough and careful process befits a fine-tuning of the charter– the supreme law of the land.
The disagreement in parliament over how a charter amendment referendum should be passed had festered to the extent that all compromise avenues have been exhausted, leaving parliament with the only option to observe a mandatory 180-day” cooling off” period, which began in December.
During this period, the issue is on the back burner. After the period ends, supporters of the amendment in the House, who make up the majority, are open to fixing the double-majority rule as they wish.
However, the six-month suspension is already pushing back the amendment schedule and has a direct knock-on effect on the charter rewrite process. Charter change supporters are now having to contend with the reality of not seeing a new constitution during this current administration, whose term ends in mid-2027.
The PP, meanwhile, refused to let a charter rewrite fall by the wayside before the next election, so it decided to try and accelerate referendum law amendment.
PP list MP Parit Wacharasindhu approached Parliament President Wan Muhammad Noor Matha in November last year to discuss the possibility of shortening the referendum process required for a charter rewrite so the country will have a new constitution penned by a charter-drafting assembly ( CDA ) before the next polls.
Mr Parit said that to do so in time, the government will have to reduce the number of charter referendums to two instead of three as originally planned.
However, Nikorn Chamnong, secretary to the joint House-Senate panel on the referendum bill, has rejected the claim by Mr Parit that two referendums would suffice.
Mr Nikorn said that, based on a March 2021 Constitutional Court ruling, the government is required to hold three rounds, and no fewer than that, if a wholesale charter rewrite is to be conducted.
He added that the meeting between Mr Wan and Mr Parit, who chairs the House committee on political development, mass communication, and public participation, does nothing to change the court’s ruling as the ruling had a broader application.
Now, Pheu Thai and PP have resorted to a different tack, this time going full throttle by taking a formative step to overhauling the charter via rectification of Section 256 of the constitution to pave the way for setting up a CDA.
A joint sitting was called on Feb 13 and 14 to adopt a change to Section 256, only to be met with resistance from many lawmakers, which culminated in the collapse of the sessions on both days due to a lack of quorum.
Bhumjaithai MPs took to the floor to declare they will not be a party to a Section 256 change, which would amount to a breach of the law if it was undertaken without a referendum being held first.
To form a CDA is essentially to rewrite the entire charter, which, according to the Constitutional Court’s ruling, requires a referendum.
But since the referendum law is nowhere near being amended and is still in deep freeze, it would be a reckless course of action to try and count chickens before they hatch, said the analyst.
The analyst said Bhumjaithai, now touted as the rising star by many voters in the conservative camp, has every reason to fear a legal backlash. Several law experts have warned that embarking on a path to modify Section 256 without a prior referendum could endanger the parties voting to do so.
It would be tantamount to defying the constitution, for which a party runs the risk of the ultimate punishment– dissolution.
Caught in the crosshairs
The opposition has filed a no-confidence motion solely targeting Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and branded her as the root cause of the government’s failures.
Paetongtarn: Has questions to answer
The accusations against the premier are serious, arguing that she lacks the necessary qualifications, experience as well as political will to address the nation’s pressing issues.
Ms Paetongtarn, according to the motion, has also appointed cabinet members based on political interest rather than merit. Under her leadership, the country’s GDP has lagged behind those of other Asean countries.
The most damaging accusation, however, is that she has allowed her father, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, to exert influence over the government while turning a blind eye to irregularities stemming from political deals made to secure the coalition’s formation.
The censure motion comes just six months after Ms Paetongtarn took office.
While some argue that the grilling may be premature, many see it as a test that will determine whether Thaksin’s 38-year-old political heir is truly independent of her father or is the worst fear of her critics.
Ms Paetongtarn, meanwhile, appears undaunted by the opposition’s upcoming scrutiny.
She seems confident in taking the opposition’s onslaught head-on and positioned herself as the country’s first Generation-Y prime minister when asked about the upcoming debate.
However, several observers say the debate could be unsettling for Thaksin, who can only watch his “beloved daughter” being grilled by the opposition from the sidelines.
Keeping silent and assigning other ministers to answer questions is not an option, so the ruling party’s attempt to limit the debate to just one day is widely seen as an effort by Pheu Thai to shield Ms Paetongtarn, according to observers.
Olarn Thinbangtieo, a political science lecturer at Burapha University, has described keeping the debate short as an outdated survival tactic that undermines the government’s credibility.
There is little doubt about the outcome of the no-confidence vote, though, as she is unlikely to emerge from the debate with flying colours.
First of all, the opposition itself lacks a knockout punch, according to Thanaporn Sriyakul, director of the Political and Public Policy Analysis Institute.
Even the controversy surrounding Thaksin’s prolonged stay at the Police General Hospital has been extensively covered by the media, leaving little room for new information that could cause further political damage. As for corruption allegations, there seems to be no substantial evidence to back them up that could otherwise inflict serious harm on the government.
Instead, Ms Paetongtarn can cash in on the government’s ongoing crackdown on call centre scams to deflect criticism, according to Mr Thanaporn.
” Right now, the government isn’t too worried about losing political points. The efforts to rein in scam gangs should earn it some credit.
” The opposition doesn’t have the firepower to sink the government, “he said.
According to Mr Thanaporn, the opposition is no Democrat Party which at its peak brought down the Banharn Silp-archa government and forced a House dissolution decades ago.
A widely reported rift between the ruling Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai parties is unlikely to rattle the coalition, although the Department of Special Investigation ( DSI) is being exploited as a political tool in the investigation into collusion in the Senate election, he said.
The analyst said the move is not about tearing down the Senate, whose members are reportedly associated with the Bhumjaithai Party, it is being orchestrated to change senator affiliations from Bhumjaithai to Pheu Thai.
Over the past week, changes have reportedly started, he noted.
At least 30 senators from the so-called” blue”, or Bhumjaithai, faction are expected to resign over concerns about their dubious qualifications, and about 70 others have quietly pledged allegiance to a new” big boss”– a reference to Thaksin, he said.
With these defections, the red camp is believed to control about half of the Senate, he said, noting that it is natural for people to seek a new financial lifeline when a current one begins to dry up.
As the Senate shifts toward the” red” camp– the colour of Pheu Thai– a new point of focus will be the selection of members of public independent organisations. This year will see new appointments in agencies such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission ( NACC ) and the Constitutional Court.
The” big boss” and the” headmaster”, a reference to Bhumjaithai founder and power broker Newin Chidchob, will continue to fight for influence over the Senate, he said.
Given this power struggle, Bhumjaithai is unlikely to break ranks with Pheu Thai and will extend solid support to the prime minister in the censure debate set to take place later this month, according to Mr Thanaporn.