Jump to content

Progressive Movement urges party unity against dissolution law


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

piyabutr.jpg

 

The Progressive Movement (PM) called on the ruling Pheu Thai Party and the opposition Move Forward Party (MFP) to unite against a controversial dissolution law, urging them to resist the legislation rather than attack each other.

 

PM Secretary-General Piyabutr Saengkanokkul posted on Facebook today, June 21, advocating for the two largest parties to find common ground. He criticised the dissolution law, describing it as unjust legislation imposed by the ‘old guards’ and equally binding on all parties.

 

This appeal follows a heated parliamentary debate earlier this week, during which MFP leader Chaithawat Tulathon and Pheu Thai spokesperson Danuporn Punakanta exchanged barbs over the national budget plan.

 

Chaithawat criticised the government for focusing on its digital wallet scheme, Pheu Thai’s flagship policy costing half a trillion baht, at the expense of the country’s future. The opposition argued that Pheu Thai would go to any length to save face over the digital wallet programme, even if it meant risking the collapse of the nation’s finances.

 

In response, Danuporn diverted the debate, instead referencing the Constitutional Court‘s proceedings on whether to dissolve the MFP for its efforts to amend Section 112 of the Criminal Code, also known as the lese majeste law.

 

He implied that this was the real issue, interpreting MFP’s actions as an attempt to undermine the constitutional monarchy.

 

Abandon hostility

 

Piyabutr, a legal expert, urged both parties to abandon the hostile mentality, where they attack each other within the confines of laws crafted by the elites to manipulate politicians. He called for united opposition to the dissolution law, which he warned could be used against any party.

 

Pheu Thai has recently faced a petition by Sonthiya Sawasdee, a former adviser to the House Committee on Law, Justice, and Human Rights, seeking to disband the party for allegedly allowing former prime minister and ex-party leader Thaksin Shinawatra to exert influence.

 

Thaksin, considered an outsider under the organic law on parties, is prohibited from knowingly influencing a party. Despite being seen as a behind-the-scenes powerbroker, the Election Commission dismissed the petition in August due to insufficient evidence.

 

Piyabutr urged parties across the divide to rally against the dissolution law to prevent any party from facing unjust dissolution.

 

The PM’s call for unity comes at a critical time, with political tensions running high and the future of key policies, such as the digital wallet scheme, hanging in the balance. The appeal highlights the broader issue of political manipulation through legislation and the need for a collective response to safeguard the democratic process, reported Bangkok Post.

 

By Ryan Turner

Image courtesy of spacebar.th

 

Source: The Thaiger 2024-06-21

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

  • Sad 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tropicalevo said:

Typical deflection by the powers that be.

If they cannot take the (rightful) criticism, they roll out Section 112 in defence.

All too commonplace of the last generation or more, even when most [if not all] supposed offenses have little association with the omni-present and draconian 112 policies. Archaic to say the least. It's become the convenient go to card for those particular circles of the old guard. 

 

Not related.....but I'd be curious to know how a "progressive" is defined here. Examples....??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

I'd be curious to know how a "progressive" is defined here. Examples....?

Any political party that has no power, ie., no backing from military conservatism?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, hotchilli said:

How do you find common ground with a party that stabbed you in the back?

A good idea but I thought they did that before the election. Something about not supporting the military in government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...