No Vote On Thai Charter Amendment, Reconciliation Bills: Parliament President

[webfact]

No vote on charter amendment, reconciliation bills: Parliament President

BANGKOK, June 12 - Thailand's President of Parliament Somsak Kiatsuranont on Tuesday reaffirmed that today's joint sitting of the Lower House and Senate will neither vote on the third reading of the charter amendment bill nor deliberate the reconciliation bill.

The parliament president made spoke as the joint parliament sitting opened this morning amid concerns that the session might vote on putting the charter amendment draft on agenda although the Constitution Court ordered Parliament to suspend deliberation of the draft pending the Court ruling on its constitutionality as petitioned by some MPs and senators.

Mr Somsak reiterated, however, that he had thoroughly considered the problem of a vote on the charter amendment as assigned by the ruling Pheu Thai Party and decided that there would be neither voting on the issue or deliberation on the reconciliation bill in the current session in order to reduce conflict and avoid any violence.

The parliament president urged the government to issue a royal decree seeking to close the session after Parliament finishes deliberating the anti-money laundering bill and the proposed framework for negotiations with other countries prior to the signing of any international agreements under Article 190 of the Constitution.

"I reiterated that, at this minute, my decision is based on national interest (as I) don't want to see any more bloodshed among Thai people," Mr Somsak said. "This is not about fear or not fearing; it's about reconciliation."

He advised that during the one-month House recess, all parties should talk together.

"I have made one step back and all parties concerned should also make similar move to discuss and find solutions together for the benefit of the country." the parliament president said.

Mr Somsak announced his decision after the opposition whip on Monday vowed to not join the vote on the third reading of charter amendment draft if it was put on the agenda.

Shortly afterward, the parliament president said that the Cabinet today resolved to end the current parliamentary session on June 19. (MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2012-06-12

[Buchholz]

Quote the OP:

Thailand's President of Parliament Somsak Kiatsuranont on Tuesday reaffirmed that today's joint sitting of the Lower House and Senate will neither vote on the third reading of the charter amendment bill nor deliberate the reconciliation bill.

Once again, Thaksin's back to the retreating after pushing....following other pushing and then retreating, push, retreat...

and push again in another month?

yes, it's a scenario that was earlier repeated last year.

Thaksin has a long history on many issues of probing the atmosphere of the public sentiment and legislative manuerving, he has typically been pushing, then retreating, then 6 months later pushing again, then backing off (like presently).

Sorry to disappoint but the PAD rally has been cancelled after news that Thaksin won't be pardoned was announced.

That's great then? I know this if it did start again? I could see the army going in and saying right thats it no more red and yellows as you can't seem to get on plus it's costing peoples livelihood then the army would be in charge of Thailand? i know this is what i would do if i was the person in charge of the army .. I'm so sick and tired of all this as I'm sure everybody else is as it's been going on for fair to long now.. Seems the safest optionin my eyes .

It will start again if the Yingluck government starts to try and exonerate Thaksin again.

PAD's always been pretty straight forward about this and the latest confirms it.

Thaksin backs off and they back off.

Edited June 12, 2012 by Buchholz

[gregb]

A step in the right direction. It is a shame they made the Constitution Court judges go so far out on a limb before coming to their senses.

Does anyone seriously believe that we would be seeing this attitude of conciliatory behavior if they weren't forced into it by the judiciary? It is just too bad we can't have a government that truly wants what is best for the country and the people.

This action was clearly the only correct action to take long before any judge got involved. It worries me that the only reason people aren't shooting at one another right now is because a few members of the judiciary had the courage to act to thwart the bloodshed. That doesn't say much for where we are headed.

[gand]

Crisis averted, red shirts can return to the farm?

[phiphidon]

A step in the right direction. It is a shame they made the Constitution Court judges go so far out on a limb before coming to their senses.

Does anyone seriously believe that we would be seeing this attitude of conciliatory behavior if they weren't forced into it by the judiciary? It is just too bad we can't have a government that truly wants what is best for the country and the people.

This action was clearly the only correct action to take long before any judge got involved. It worries me that the only reason people aren't shooting at one another right now is because a few members of the judiciary had the courage to act to thwart the bloodshed. That doesn't say much for where we are headed.

To be fair the constitution court did what they thought/decided was right (whether they were or not will be found out in the next few weeks) because they were put into that position by the dems and others coming up with ludicrous accusations about the 3rd reading of the charter reform bill being a plot to overthrow the head of state.

Edited June 12, 2012 by phiphidon

[Nickymaster]

A step in the right direction. It is a shame they made the Constitution Court judges go so far out on a limb before coming to their senses.

Does anyone seriously believe that we would be seeing this attitude of conciliatory behavior if they weren't forced into it by the judiciary? It is just too bad we can't have a government that truly wants what is best for the country and the people.

This action was clearly the only correct action to take long before any judge got involved. It worries me that the only reason people aren't shooting at one another right now is because a few members of the judiciary had the courage to act to thwart the bloodshed. That doesn't say much for where we are headed.

To be fair the constitution court did what they thought/decided was right (whether they were or not will be found out in the next few weeks) because they were put into that position by the dems and others coming up with ludicrous accusations about the 3rd reading of the charter reform bill being a plot to overthrow the head of state.

To be fair, if the PT party wouldn't have had a history of sneaking in bills and laws to whitewash Thaksin, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if the PT party wouldn't have a history of hiding information (being unclear on contents) in bills and laws to whitewash Thaksin, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if the house speaker wouldn't have called for an urgent deliberation of un-urgent bills, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if it wouldn't have been ALL for Thaksin but instead for Thailand and ALL its people, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations

Edited June 12, 2012 by Nickymaster

[Misterwhisper]

"Thailand's President of Parliament Somsak Kiatsuranont on Tuesday reaffirmed that today's joint sitting of the Lower House and Senate will neither vote on the third reading of the charter amendment bill nor deliberate the reconciliation bill.

Once again, Thaksin's back to the retreating after pushing....following other pushing and then retreating, push, retreat...

and push again in another month?"

And he NEVER EVER stops. He's a bit like that little kid from "The Ring". He doesn't care whether he drags the whole country down the drain in the process, because megalomaniacs are insensitive to such issues. All they ever want is to get it their way, whatever the cost.

[Nickymaster]

"I reiterated that, at this minute, my decision is based on national interest (as I) don't want to see any more bloodshed among Thai people," Mr Somsak said. "This is not about fear or not fearing; it's about reconciliation."

...says the guy who has started this mess to satisfy his master. Mr. Somsak you truly must have been surprised by the potential violence and even MORE division the "reconciliation bill" was going to create.

Well, Mr. Somsak, shame on you for this hypocritical act.

[webfact]

POLITICS

Charter review bill vote and reconciliation bill postponed

Somsak

BANGKOK: -- Parliament President Somsak Kiatsuranont on Tuesday reaffirmed that today's joint sitting of the Lower House and Senate will neither vote on the third reading of the charter amendment bill nor deliberate the controversial reconciliation bill.

He was speaking as the joint parliament sitting opened this morning amid concerns that the session might vote to put the charter amendment draft on agenda even though the Constitution Court has ordered Parliament to suspend deliberation of the draft pending the Court ruling on its constitutionality as petitioned by some MPs and senators.

Somsak reiterated, however, that he had thoroughly considered the problem of a vote on the charter amendment as assigned by the ruling Pheu Thai Party and decided that there would be neither voting on the issue nor deliberation on the reconciliation bill in the current session in order to reduce conflict and avoid any violence.

The parliament president urged the government to issue a royal decree seeking to close the session after Parliament finishes deliberating the anti-money laundering bill and the proposed framework for negotiations with other countries prior to the signing of any international agreements under Article 190 of the Constitution.

"I reiterate that, at this minute, my decision is based on national interest (as I) don’t want to see any more bloodshed among Thai people," Somsak said. "This is not about fear or not fearing; it's about reconciliation."

He advised that during the one-month House recess, all parties should talk together.

"I have taken one step back and all parties concerned should also make a similar move to discuss and find solutions together for the benefit of the country," the parliament president said.

Somsak announced his decision after the opposition whip on Monday vowed to not join the vote on the third reading of charter amendment draft if it were put on the agenda.

Shortly afterwards, the parliament president said that the Cabinet today resolved to end the current parliamentary session on June 19.

-- The Nation 2012-06-12

[webfact]

Cabinet approves draft decree to close parliamentary session on June 19

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Cabinet Tuesday approved a draft royal decree to close the current parliamentary session on June 19.

The draft will be submitted for a royal command before it will be published in the Royal Gazette.

-- The Nation 2012-06-12

[culicine]

Si if PT really believe this bill will bring about "reconciliation" why didn't they push it through and sod everyone else. And they will close the parliamentary session in the name of reconciliation? ...perhaps because we all know it has nothing to do with reconciliation!

[phiphidon]

A step in the right direction. It is a shame they made the Constitution Court judges go so far out on a limb before coming to their senses.

Does anyone seriously believe that we would be seeing this attitude of conciliatory behavior if they weren't forced into it by the judiciary? It is just too bad we can't have a government that truly wants what is best for the country and the people.

This action was clearly the only correct action to take long before any judge got involved. It worries me that the only reason people aren't shooting at one another right now is because a few members of the judiciary had the courage to act to thwart the bloodshed. That doesn't say much for where we are headed.

To be fair the constitution court did what they thought/decided was right (whether they were or not will be found out in the next few weeks) because they were put into that position by the dems and others coming up with ludicrous accusations about the 3rd reading of the charter reform bill being a plot to overthrow the head of state.

To be fair, if the PT party wouldn't have had a history of sneaking in bills and laws to whitewash Thaksin, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if the PT party wouldn't have a history of hiding information (being unclear on contents) in bills and laws to whitewash Thaksin, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if the house speaker wouldn't have called for an urgent deliberation of un-urgent bills, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if it wouldn't have been ALL for Thaksin but instead for Thailand and ALL its people, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations

BUT, They are still ludicrous actions by the dems I'm glad you all agree.

[Nickymaster]

A step in the right direction. It is a shame they made the Constitution Court judges go so far out on a limb before coming to their senses.

Does anyone seriously believe that we would be seeing this attitude of conciliatory behavior if they weren't forced into it by the judiciary? It is just too bad we can't have a government that truly wants what is best for the country and the people.

This action was clearly the only correct action to take long before any judge got involved. It worries me that the only reason people aren't shooting at one another right now is because a few members of the judiciary had the courage to act to thwart the bloodshed. That doesn't say much for where we are headed.

To be fair the constitution court did what they thought/decided was right (whether they were or not will be found out in the next few weeks) because they were put into that position by the dems and others coming up with ludicrous accusations about the 3rd reading of the charter reform bill being a plot to overthrow the head of state.

To be fair, if the PT party wouldn't have had a history of sneaking in bills and laws to whitewash Thaksin, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if the PT party wouldn't have a history of hiding information (being unclear on contents) in bills and laws to whitewash Thaksin, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if the house speaker wouldn't have called for an urgent deliberation of un-urgent bills, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations.

To be fair, if it wouldn't have been ALL for Thaksin but instead for Thailand and ALL its people, the dems didn't have to come up with ludicrous accusations

BUT, They are still ludicrous actions by the dems I'm glad you all agree.

BUT, this ludicrous action might have saved many lives.

Edited June 12, 2012 by Nickymaster

[lungmi]

Thailand never had a coherent judiciary system. When Tailand under Rama V (Chulalongkorn) established a westen inspired judiciary system there

was a big problem: no judges!!!

The first judges were Britains!!!!

Nowadays we see the same problem. The CC is attacked by many people (all experts for democracy), but they all forget that the CC is the highest value of democracy in Thailand to be protected.

Edited June 12, 2012 by lungmi

[webfact]

Thailand delays voting on politically-charged bills

Bangkok, June 12, 2012 (AFP) - Thailand's government said on Tuesday that it was postponing voting in parliament on controversial "reconciliation" proposals that have stoked political tensions in the divided kingdom.

The bills are strongly opposed by opposition MPs who fear they will be used to grant an amnesty to fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, ousted by royalist generals in a 2006 coup.

The cabinet agreed to seek a royal decree to end the current parliamentary session on June 19, said government spokeswoman Sansanee Nakpong.

"It's not about being brave or a coward, surrendering or not surrendering, but I want all parties to face each other and talk," Lower House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont said as he announced the move in parliament.

Thaksin, a former telecoms tycoon who lives in Dubai to avoid a jail term for corruption, is loved by many rural and poor Thais for his populist policies while in power, but hated by the elite who see him as a threat to the monarchy.

Thaksin's sister Yingluck Shinawatra is now prime minister following a landslide election win by her brother's party last year.

One of the draft laws, which aims to amend the kingdom's constitution, has angered royalists who see it as an attempt to weaken the monarchy.

Thousands of royalist "Yellow Shirt" protesters blockaded parliament last month to prevent the house from discussing the reconciliation plans.

The government's moves have also put it at odds with the judiciary: the Constitutional Court ordered a halt to voting on the charter amendment bill after a complaint by senators that it aimed to overthrow the monarchy.

The government has not scrapped its plan to change the constitution, Sansanee said.

"Prime Minister Yingluck said clearly during the cabinet meeting that her government insisted to go ahead with charter amendment as she promised during her policy statement," Sansanee said.

"But the government agreed to end the session to enable brainstorming by all parties and to create a favourable climate," she added.

Earlier this month Yingluck warned Thailand faces a "cycle of violence" unless steps are taken towards reconciliation after years of civil unrest.

In 2010 mass protests by Thaksin's "Red Shirt" supporters against the previous government descended into the kingdom's worst civil violence in decades, with more than 90 people killed in a military crackdown.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2012-06-12

[webfact]

Office of the Council of State: Government will inform Constitution Court by June 15 that amendment bill falls under Section 291, doesn't violate Section 68 of Constitution /MCOT

[gand]

Reconciliation that sparks civil war, how is that for reconciliation.

[Moruya]

Reconciliation that sparks civil war, how is that for reconciliation.

Division Bill is more apt.

Brought to you by the

Pardon Thaksin People