Opinions cut on Part 112 offenders
PUBLISHED: 22 Sep 2024 at 07: 43
On Thursday, lawmakers may question whether Area 112 of the Criminal Code, also known as the der majeste law, may be covered by an asylum bill.
The unique House committee studying an asylum costs, led by Nikorn Chamnong, has been working on the draft bill for more than a month.
Due to the active parliament meeting plan, the committee’s statement on the president’s policy will only be debated by politicians on Sept 26, he said.
A particular section has created responses to a number of inquiries regarding the statement, ranging from the president’s controversial points to how a council will be formed to create the draft version of the legislation.
Mr. Nikorn claimed that the particular committee’s decision regarding whether Section 112 offenders should receive an amnesty was unconclusive.
The 35-member panel was established in early this year at the request of the ruling Pheu Thai Party to conduct a study on the amnesty proposal following a bill sponsored by the now-defunct Move Forward Party, which has since been renamed People’s Party ( PP ), which met resistance in parliament.
The commission reached no finish regarding crimes against the King, the Queen, the heir-apparent or king, which are governed by Sections 112 and 110 of the Criminal Code. However, the board has included the council members ‘ views in its statement.
There are three mind groups, according to the section: those who want the crimes to be made exempt from the act, those who favor their participation, and those who want them to be made subject to special conditions.
According to Mr. Nikorn, the agency’s report advises that the government stakeholder the asylum bill, but that it should only be limited to 25 legal charges, as the cabinet approved in 2005.
He agreed that Section 112 is a sensitive subject that warrants more conversation.
However, Jakrapob Penkair, a former official for excellent minister Thaksin Shinawatra who recently returned to India after 15 years of self-imposed exile abroad, claimed that Part 112 should not be included in the asylum costs.
In an interview with an online news organization, he said amending the law is about sacrifice.
” One should n’t feel or be made to feel]like ] they’ve lost all or gained everything from doing it”, he said.
” I do n’t think Section 112 should be contained in an amnesty”.