Senator Somchai Sawangkan apparently lost his cool over a remark at the red-shirt rally on Utthayan Road last weekend, saying too much had been said which did not mirror the truth.
Somchai: Loses his cool
His remark countered a speech at the rally given by Robert Amsterdam, the legal eagle who supports the red-shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), who skyped in from overseas and voiced blanket criticism of the anti-government People’s Democratic Reform Committee, the Democrats, the National Anti-Corruption Commission, the Constitutional Court and the army.
Mr Amsterdam also claimed during the rally that the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) has in the past issued a resolution critical of the Constitutional Court’s interpretation of the clause on “collective guilt” in the charter, which refers to the political ban the court handed down against executives of political parties, including the now-defunct Thai Rak Thai Party on charges of complicity in electoral fraud.
Established in 1889, the IPU is an international organisation of parliaments whose job is to forge world-wide parliamentary dialogue and work for peace and co-operation among peoples and for the firm establishment of representative democracy.
Sen Somchai, who is a member of the standing committee on foreign affairs, wrote on his Facebook page that he could not stand listening to Mr Amsterdam feeding what he termed as lies to the cheering crowds of red-shirt supporters.
Drawing on the IPU issue, the senator said a certain female former MP had travelled to Geneva earlier to present a letter to IPU secretary-general Anders B Johnsson, seeking his attention on an important issue, which is understood to be the failed Feb 2 general election in Thailand.
Sen Somchai said that to his knowledge, the letter was indeed handed to Mr Johnsson. However, the former MP did not meet with representatives of the nations which are signatories of the IPU. The senator said it could have been a case of the former MP having been denied participation in the IPU meeting from March 15-19.
He said it puzzled him that the letter was presented sometime between March 25 and 26, which came almost a week after the IPU meeting had concluded.
No issue related to elections in Thailand were raised at the IPU meeting.
Sen Somchai also said he failed to see the logic in submitting the letter to Mr Johnsson who is leaving his post as the IPU secretary-general at the end of June.
All the IPU secretary-general could do was receive the letter and he is in no position to condemn or comment on Thailand’s electoral affairs, according to the senator.
Meanwhile, the Senate standing committee on foreign affairs, chaired by Pikulkaew Krairiksh, has travelled to a number of countries to pass on information about the country’s political developments to fellow parliamentarians, Sen Somchai said.
Earlier, the committee met with the foreign affairs permanent secretary Sihasak Phuangketkeow to discuss issues relating to caretaker Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul’s disclosure that officials had drawn up a letter inviting United Nations secretary-general Ban Ki-moon to help mediate talks to resolve the political crisis.
The committee said the current problems are simply protests against graft or a corrupt government and therefore domestic affairs. The political unrest has not yet reached a level which requires UN intervention.
One of the prominent members of the so-called Group of 40 Senators, Sen Somchai has reiterated that he believes there is a need to spread the word and explain to people outside the country what is going on in Thailand and why many people have risen up against the government. The Senate group is made up mostly of appointed MPs.
The standing committee members previously made a trip to the US where they talked to some legislators in the Congress and were interviewed in a programme broadcast on the Voice of America radio channel in Washington DC.
A long wait in the trenches
The wait for the ruling that could see the axe fall on Yingluck Shinawatra’s premiership has been agonisingly long for some anti-government protesters — and it might get even longer.
The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and the Constitutional Court are being counted on by the People’s Democratic Reform Committee protesters to put forth decisions to sideline Ms Yingluck.
Yingluck: No quick decision
The NACC may well be close to wrapping up its investigation into a charge of of duty against Ms Yingluck. The premier stands accused of looking the other way at alleged graft in the controversial rice-pledging scheme. The commission has a few more defence witnesses to question before deciding whether there are grounds to the allegation and indict Ms Yingluck.
The Constitutional Court, meanwhile, has admitted the case in which Ms Yingluck is alleged to have unlawfully transferred Thawil Pliensri from his position as secretary-general of the National Security Council (NSC).
The admission of the case came after the Supreme Administrative Court ruled that her transfer of Mr Thawil was unlawful. Mr Thawil was removed in September 2011, paving the way for then police chief Pol Gen Wichean Potephosree to replace him and Pol Gen Priewpan Damapong, a relative of Ms Yingluck, to become police chief.
Ms Yingluck faces charges of malpractice in office in the case. If found guilty, she will lose her post as prime minister.
The outcome of both cases in the NACC and the Constitutional Court could produce the same result. However, how fast the rulings will be handed down is another story.
The PDRC protesters have been counting down to the day when either the commission or the court delivers a decision on Ms Yingluck. They have shown themselves to be upbeat about the prospect of the premier being purged from office — then they could celebrate their victory after more than five months of non-stop street protests.
Some protesters believe the NACC will beat the Constitutional Court in the race to wrap up the cases. But as the Constitutional Court needs only to interpret the letter of the charter in determining if Ms Yingluck violated the constitution by shifting Mr Thawil from his post, it will probably make a decision sooner than many have anticipated.
At any rate, the protesters are pinning their hopes on both or either case being over and done with before the month is out.
However, the rice scheme investigation by the NACC could drag on for weeks longer with three more witnesses being called to testify in Ms Yingluck’s defence. They are caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong, caretaker Deputy Commerce Minister Yanyong Phuangrach and caretaker Commerce Minister Niwatthamrong Bunsongphaisan.
Although the NACC permitted only three of 11 witnesses requested by Ms Yingluck to give statements, the commission insists it made the concession in the name of fairness, said a highly placed source in the NACC.
The commission said the extra witnesses were allowed to quell any criticism that it was not investigating Ms Yingluck even-handedly. Mr Yanyong testified last week, although his information may not prove very helpful for Ms Yingluck as much of what he explained to the NACC dwelt on the rice-pledging project’s concept and ideals. He did not provide much in the way of rebuttals to the alleged corruption, said a source familiar with the matter.
At the same time, the NACC has granted Mr Kittiratt’s request to delay giving a statement. The caretaker finance minister is away in the United States attending a World Bank meeting and cannot testify before the Songkran holidays this week.
Government opponents allege Mr Kittiratt is resorting to delaying tactics. And with every new witness and a pile of written statement to be read, the NACC could watch the opportunity of a quick conclusion to its inquiry slip through its fingers.
Now it seems the PDRC protesters who are camping out at Lumpini Park won’t be packing up and going home any time soon.
Fear factor of politics
The day Boonyuen Siritham reported to parliament as senator-elect for Samut Songkram, she breathed a bit easier as she was “out of the woods”, so to speak.
On April 9, she was among the first winners of the Senate election on March 30 to breeze through the doors of the parliament building to register as a senator-elect.
Boonyuen: Bullet-proof vest
It was also the first time in many days that she had been able to come out of hiding.
Ms Boonyuen, a woman of humble origins in a fishing family who has led a struggle for the betterment of the people in her village in tambon Bang Kaew of Muang district, won 22,933 votes in the Senate election, beating her nearest rival by almost 10,000 votes.
But the moment the unofficial vote count came out, Ms Boonyuen, 58, found herself in no mood for celebration. Her opponents took to the poll rally stage and declared her election victory would not last.
A death threat then arrived on her doorstep.
Immediately, she left her house under a heavy escort of security guards sent by former Democrat Party MP for Samut Prakan Rangsima Rodrassamee.
Ms Boonyuen wore a bullet-proof vest weighing more than two kilos as she was led to a van which took her to a safe house in a province in the North.
For seven days before the Election Commission officially endorsed most of the senators-elect, she kept out of sight. Her only contact with the outside world was via phone calls to family and friends.
It marked “seven dangerous days” for her. If she should perish before the EC announced the endorsement, the first runner-up in the election would take her place without the requirement of a fresh election, according to the election law.
So, the EC’s endorsement gave her a very welcome sense of freedom, she said.
Ms Boonyuen knew that when she signed up to contest the Senate election, the road ahead would be strewn with spikes. Several others with backgrounds in community work ran in the poll.
In the end, Ms Boonyuen came out top in the race, edging out some of the candidate hopefuls thought to have a strong support base from political parties.
Senate candidates and senators are banned from being affiliated with or supported by political parties.
Ms Boonyuen, with only a Grade 4 education, entered the non-formal education system when she was 28. She went on to complete her tertiary education and graduated with a master’s degree.
Twenty years ago, Ms Boonyuen was among the vocal campaigners who demanded improvements to the living conditions of people in her community in Pak Mab village, which had been without electricity, running water and even paved roads. The campaign at times pitted her against the district office.
She also was part of a group which opposed the operation of oil-laden barges in the Mae Klong River and the establishment of an industrial estate in the province.
Her roles in civil movements include memberships of a consumer protection federation and the group calling for nationalisation of PTT Plc, the country’s giant energy conglomerate.