Pheu Thai no-shows sabotage consensus
Due to a lack of a vote and the lack of MPs from the judgement Pheu Thai Party seen as a strategic move to reduce its expenses from being rejected, a joint session of MPs and senators deliberating law act bills was adjourned on Thursday.
Just 204 politicians were present, which is less than half of the total number of MPs and lawmakers required. Parliament President Wan Muhamad Noor Matha ordered a vote search at 9:30am.
At least quarter of all 500 Members and 200 lawmakers are required for a vote.
Due to this, Mr. Wan decided to postpone the appointment until Friday, at 9o’clock.
The charter amendment bills, proposed by People’s Party ( PP ) MP Parit Wacharasindhu and Pheu Thai MP Wisut Chainaroon, aimed to amend Section 256 of the constitution to establish a charter-drafting assembly to draw up a new constitution.
Before the appointment began, Members of the Bhumjaithai Party, a authorities coalition part, staged a protest in opposition.
They argued that the constitution may be violated by the Constitutional Court’s 2021 requirement for a public vote before beginning the mandate writing process.
Anutin Charnvirakul, the head of the Bhumjaithai Party, claimed the group is only acting in response to the judge’s decision and not trying to obstruct Pheu Thai’s attempt to write a new constitution.
The court ruled in 2021 that if a move to alter the whole charter is approved, a second referendum must be held to see if the public would give in to the new content.
Sen. Premsak Piayura requested an immediate motion to the Constitutional Court to determine whether the legislature could amend the constitution without second conducting a referendum.
The action sparked a contentious debate among lawmakers and lawmakers.
Because the congress president has the authority to put the movement to the agenda, Pakornwut Udompipatskul, a PP list-MP, claimed the celebration disagreed with the movement.
He argued that politicians have the authority to change the law.
” Amending the constitution is an essential problem to ensure the power of politicians.
” If they do not attempt to carry out their duties, they may not present themselves to represent the people, “he said.
After that, Mr. Premsak requested a second vote check, which revealed that only 180 parliamentarians had armed themselves with ID cards for the meeting.
Mr Parit protested, saying Pheu Thai had 140 Members and his group had 140 Members, making it unrealistic for just 180 politicians to be present.
Julapun Amornvivat, a Pheu Thai MP, defended their presence, arguing that members of parliament had the proper to choose whether to be present for a vote test.
However, Mr. Parit claimed that since Pheu Thai had suggested the bill’s help, its MPs may become present to support it.
Sutin Klungsang, a member of Pheu Thai, stated that the organization was concerned that the bill’s rejection might fight with the court’s decision.
Hence, the party decided to skip the gathering to avoid a quorum.
Mr. Sutin claimed that Pheu Thai initially backed Mr. Premsak’s request for a court decision.
Pheu Thai used the non-participation tactic to compel the postponement and keep the costs in parliament because the action couldn’t be moved up the plan, he said.
Somkid Chueakong, assistant secretary-general of the primary minister, criticised the PP for trying to move forward with the law amendment process.
He claimed that Pheu Thai agreed to Mr. Premsak’s request for a court ruling on the matter, which should be submitted in no more than two months.
The PP ought to be aware that if they persist, they may face a rock that lies ahead if they insist on proceeding.
There is still a chance to advance, according to Mr. Somkid, if we wait for no more than a quarter before a Constitutional Court’s decision.