The Lower House's recent decision to shoot down a report on an amnesty bill, including an analysis of the lese majeste laws, will make it much harder for the country to address much-needed reconciliation.
The report's thwarting has much to do with Pheu Thai's reversal of its stance on reforming Section 112, which was a party election campaign promise.
The study prepared by the Lower House's special committee is not legally binding. It only examines overall problems on political charges and offers views and solutions.
The Lower House voted 270:152 against the report, with most Pheu Thai members defending their reservations.
They said the Section 112 amendment is too sensitive and involves security matters.
The report, chaired by Pheu Thai MP Chusak Sirinil, was intended to give input to the House when it convenes early next month to consider four existing amnesty bills.
Apart from lese majeste, the report also looks into the application and impact of Section 110 of the Criminal Code for anyone harming the monarch and/or trespassing on the freedom of the Queen, the heir apparent, and the regent. Those convicted of violating Section 110 face 16-20 years or even lifetime imprisonment.
The study proposes to recommend an amnesty.
The lawmakers' move against the report does not bode well for the committee's deliberation of four amnesty bills when it convenes early next month.
The four are proposed by the people's sector, the now-dissolved Move Forward party (MFP), which covers all political cases, the United Thai Nation party, and the Teachers for the People Party.
The Pheu Thai Party is said to have its own bill that does not include Section 112 offences, as demanded by political activists and academic groups.
The ruling party has been going back and forth on S112 from the beginning. Promises for a lese majeste law amendment and bail for those accused of offending the high institution were made during the 2023 election campaign for political gains.
The party earlier said that its Section 112 amendment proposal is not tantamount to abolishing the monarchy and that parliament should be where this contentious law is discussed.
Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra was quoted by media early last year as saying this law should be discussed in parliament.
But the latest development only attests to those words being just rhetoric. Regardless of political hues and ideologies, lese majeste remains the elephant in the room.
During the four years of the Prayut Chan-o-cha administration, at least 275 people, mostly young activists, faced charges of Section 112 violation in over 300 lawsuits. This has affected civil society, and addressing it is needed to move the nation forward.
Making this crucial yet orthodox law untouchable will only expose it to politicisation and possibly affect the monarchy it was meant to defend.
By refusing to even discuss the contentious issues in parliament, our lawmakers invite self-censorship into the heart of a democratic institute.