Anyone who caught the broadcast of yesterday’s parliamentary debate was in for quite a surprise. Dubbed “D-Day”, the highly anticipated “political showdown” over the eligibility of Move Forward Party (MFP) leader Pita Limjaroenrat’s PM candidacy included a fearsome debate about the party’s plan to amend the infamous Section 112 of the Criminal Code, or the lese majeste law.
The law is becoming a deciding factor in Mr Pita’s bid for the premiership. His eight-party coalition mustered 312 votes from the May 14 general election, meaning he needs to grab at least 64 votes more from MPs and/ or senators to become the nation’s 30th prime minister, according to the 2017 charter.
It remains uncertain whether he will be able to achieve this given that so many senators and MPs belong to minority conservative parties, and many are reportedly planning to vote against him or abstain. They cite the lese majeste law as the main reason why.
Yesterday, these senators — led by Sen Seree Suwanpanont, Sen Kamnoon Sidhisamarn and Sen Somchai Sawaengkarn — took to the floor to criticise the MFP’s policy to rewrite this part of the charter, as well as its support for youngsters charged with defaming the monarchy. They claimed this is part of the party’s goal of undermining the monarchy.
The debate served as a mirror reflecting the problems surrounding the implementation of Section 112. To be fair, it also showed that the MFP has been unable to make its campaign to rewrite Section 112 inclusive and that the party has also been unsuccessful in winning trust from all sides of the political spectrum, especially the conservative camp.
The only way for the party to amend this law is to make the public, especially more conservatively minded people, part of the process and gradually work together with them. To successfully revise a law of this magnitude requires inclusivity and bipartisan support.
The MFP first made the proposal in late 2021. This would see prison terms greatly reduced from three to 15 years to just 12 months, plus a maximum fine of 300,000 baht for an insult made to the King, and six months in jail and/or a 200,000-baht fine if made against the Queen, Heir Apparent or Regent.
It also seeks to make the Bureau of the Royal Household the only authority that can file lese majeste complaints with the police, rather than it being a tool that can be wielded by all.
The proposed bill was thrown out by Deputy House Speaker Suchart Tancharoen under the rationale that it contravenes Section 6 of Thai constitution, which stipulates: “The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated. No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action.”
Right-wing activists have even asked the Constitutional Court to rule whether the MFP’s campaign undermines the nation’s constitutional monarchy. If the charter court finds the party has violated the charter, it risks facing penalties.
So Mr Pita’s future remains uncertain. But whoever does become the next prime minister and leads the government will have a major hurdle to cross in ensuring Section 112 is implemented in a way that is free of political interference or to achieve other hidden agendas.
The penalties must be appropriate and align with international standards of human rights. Leaving this issue unresolved will only undermine the revered monarchy and deepen political divisiveness.