The House of Representatives need only review the findings of a study on a political amnesty bill, which is not about the amnesty law itself but rather how to draft it, according to Prime Minister’s Office Minister Chousak Sirinil.
The House is scheduled to consider the study on Thursday. The submission of the report has already been delayed twice and Mr Chousak urged on Wednesday that it not be delayed any further.
Mr Chousak, the legal expert of the governing Pheu Thai Party, chaired the committee that prepared the report. He said it was not about abolishing or amending any specific law or whether offenders of a specific offence should be granted amnesty.
Lawmakers are attempting to draft a law that could cover a range of offences arising from political conflicts going back some two decades. Some who favour amnesty for lese-majeste offences say the law is often applied to silence political dissent. But others insist that all offences against the royal defamation law are criminal in nature.
Ultimately, Mr Chousak said, how the law is drafted or what type of law would be proposed is up to those who have the authority to introduce legislation.
The report does specify, however, that Section 112 of the Criminal Code — the lese-majeste law — is politically sensitive and concerned parties must take this into consideration, he insisted.
“No abolition or amendment of any law. Section 112 remains intact. How things proceed depends on those in charge,” he said.
Mr Chousak’s committee drew no conclusion on this contentious issue. It floated three options — an amnesty for lese-majeste offenders, no amnesty for them, or a conditional amnesty.
Even so, it is still not certain if the committee’s report will be reviewed by the House as planned as some coalition parties — Bhumjaithai, United Thai Nation and the Democrat Party — strongly oppose extending any kind of amnesty to Section 112 offenders.
Bhumjaithai leader Anutin Charnvirakul reiterated on Wednesday that the amnesty law must not cover Section 112 offenders or corruption.
Pheu Thai spokesman Danuporn Punnakanta said that as long as it remains unclear if lese-majeste offences will be included in the amnesty proposal, the report should not be brought forward for discussion or approval.
People’s Party leader and opposition leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut said he saw no reason why the House should reject the committee’s report.
He said the committee comprised representatives from the government and opposition and there was no need to debate the content at all.
Whether or not an amnesty law will cover lese-majeste offences is a separate legislative process.
“I think rejecting the report could indicate excessive fear. The report has been examined by the committee representing all political parties,” he said.
Mr Natthaphong said that if the report is rejected by the House, his party would still move ahead with its policy on amnesty for political offences.
The party has stressed, though, that this would be done in the context of the Constitutional Court ruling that dissolved its predecessor, the Move Forward Party, for advocating for amendments to Section 112.
