Detractors of ethical ideas obiect against them.
The ruling Pheu Thai Party, which claims the party is only interested in clarifying what constitutes moral grounds for prosecuting those who hold public office, has denied undermining the ethical standards set forth by the constitution for political postholders.
Critics have warned that the party’s attempt to calm the ethical standards for social postholders could serve as a justification for a power grab.
Sorawong Thienthong, the party’s secretary-general, disclosed yesterday that the group is meeting with coalition partners to discuss the changes that it is sponsoring in terms of officials ‘ codes of conduct.
He claimed that the decision may weaken the authority of the judges to rule on such cases.
According to Mr. Sorawong, “our goal is to provide a clearer framework for what constitutes an honest breach by a politician.”
He said ethics-related modifications will be pursued article by article, no through a update of the whole law.
Mr. Worawong acknowledged that political support weighed on the likelihood of passing any amendments that were based on ethics.
” We need to talk it through with them ]other parties ] first”, he added.
Key characters in the government’s Bhumjaithai, United Thai Nation ( UTN) and Democrat events have openly opposed changes to the morality provisions, which reviewers have also slammed as self-serving and which they say chance sowing the seeds of the government’s fate.
Since party members are trying to reshape the ethics rules, prolific petitioner Srisuwan Janya stated yesterday that they stand to lose because it is being enforced in this way.
He claimed that a number of politicians were facing honest offences or were in danger of doing so, thus weakening the charter’s enforcement of these provisions would be equivalent to a conflict of interest. Mr Srisuwan added the article may even interfere with the National Anti-Corruption Commission’s authority to prosecute political postholders.
Previous red-shirt head Jatuporn Prompan said the proposed changes “loosen up” the scope of ethical standards and “masculate” the authority of the Constitutional Court by requiring two-thirds of nine courts to reject a government minister on moral grounds rather than a simple lot.
He claimed that Pheu Thai’s modifications might elicit opposition and act as a launchpad for a military revolution.