Opposition is rapidly mounting against a bid by the ruling Pheu Thai Party and the main opposition People’s Party (PP) to amend parts of the 2017 constitution, particularly those related to the ethical standards for political office-holders. The Bhumjaithai Party, a coalition partner, and a prominent senator have joined these growing calls to halt any changes to these key charter provisions.
Last Wednesday, Pheu Thai submitted its partial charter amendment bill to the House, following a similar submission by the PP the week before. House Speaker Wan Muhamad Noor Matha announced that the deliberation on these bills in the Lower House is likely to commence around mid-October, potentially even earlier, but definitely not later than the end of this month.
The contentious charter provisions include Section 160, which establishes the prerequisites for aspiring cabinet ministers. It mandates that they must be demonstrably honest and free of any severe ethical violations as political office-holders.
Pol Col Kob Atchanakitti, a senator linked with the “blue” camp, referencing Bhumjaithai, staunchly opposed the plan to amend charter provisions regarding ethics for political office-holders. “Ethics are paramount for politicians. If they lack ethics, they should step away from politics and stay home. Parliament is not a place for personal whims,” he asserted.
He further emphasized that politicians should prioritize addressing issues affecting the populace rather than meddling with the constitution. “Political crises arise because some politicians fail to uphold the law,” Pol Col Kob added.
Deputy House Speaker and Bhumjaithai MP Paradorn Prissananantakul echoed similar sentiments, insisting that the charter should not be amended for politicians’ benefit and any change must serve the people’s best interests. “Will the proposed charter amendment benefit politicians? People do not listen to politicians who have a vested interest in such changes. The public must have the final say,” Paradorn stated.
Chaichana Detdecho, deputy leader of the coalition partner Democrat Party, also voiced his disagreement with revising the ethical standards for political office-holders. He maintains that individuals in government positions must be prepared to be scrutinized under the charter’s ethical standards.
Paiboon Nititawan, secretary-general of the Palang Pracharath Party, cautioned that any attempt by politicians to revise the charter’s ethical standards for personal gain could lead to a conflict of interest. Meanwhile, Thanakorn Wangboonkongchana, deputy leader of the United Thai Nation Party (UTN), another coalition partner, has also previously opposed such amendments. He pointed out that Sections 160 (4) and (5) are designed to prevent individuals lacking moral standards from gaining power in public office, and any effort to undermine these provisions could facilitate unscrupulous individuals rising to power.
Despite the previous support for amendments by Justice Minister Pol Col Tawee Sodsong, he appeared to shift his stance on Saturday. Tawee, who leads the Prachachart Party, acknowledged the need for maintaining ethical standards but emphasized that the ethical code must be clearly defined and articulated to serve as an effective reference.
Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, a former election commissioner, warned that attempts to rewrite the charter—especially those concerning ethics for politicians and the power scope of independent agencies—might backfire. He recalled the Pheu Thai Party’s earlier effort during the Yingluck Shinawatra administration, which sparked mass street protests and culminated in the 2014 coup that ousted the Pheu Thai-led government. The blanket amnesty bill at that time was perceived as an attempt to legally exonerate her older brother, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
Changing ethics standards for politicians is simply unacceptable. How can we trust our leaders if we keep lowering the bar for them?
Totally agree, Samantha. If they want to change anything, it should be to make those standards stricter, not weaker.
But isn’t this just an attempt to modernize the constitution and adapt to current political realities? We can’t be stuck in the past forever.
Tony, adapting doesn’t mean compromising on fundamental ethics. This is about integrity, which should never be negotiable.
Exactly, Samantha! Politicians should walk the talk and always hold themselves to the highest ethical standards.
Isn’t this how dictatorships start? By erasing ethical guidelines for political advantage?
A bit dramatic there, Mike. One amendment to the constitution doesn’t equate to dictatorship.
Chris, history shows us it’s a slippery slope. Any erosion of checks and balances can be dangerous.
Why are we focusing so much on this? There are bigger issues at hand like healthcare and education.
Those are crucial, Alice, but governance plays a critical role in addressing those very issues. If the leaders lack ethics, how can we trust them to fix anything?
Fair point, Dr. James. But shouldn’t we also focus on immediate needs and not get bogged down by politics?
Isn’t this all just political posturing? Politicians are always looking out for themselves, no matter the party.
That’s the issue, Grower134. If ethics are sidelined, selfish politicians will have an open field to exploit.
Why is everyone so surprised? Politicians have always bent rules for their benefit.
But that doesn’t mean we should accept it, Sarah. Just because it’s a trend doesn’t mean it’s right.
Agreed, but how do we change something so ingrained in the system?
If ethics are clearly defined and well-articulated, it can actually benefit the political system. Let’s ensure politicians adhere to high standards rather than lowering them.
Totally agree. But who decides what counts as high standards?
Bill, that’s why we need an independent body to oversee and enforce these standards impartially.
This is just another power grab. I’m tired of politicians pretending it’s about the people.
Why don’t we have a referendum on this? Let the people decide if they want ethical standards changed.
Didn’t we learn anything from Thaksin’s era? Ethics are crucial, and any attempt to water them down is a step back for democracy.
Spot on! We can’t afford to repeat the same mistakes.
People who support this amendment must be insane. Our politicians already have too much leeway as it is.
Or maybe they’re just tired of endless red tape and want to speed up governance. Not everything is a conspiracy.
We teach our kids the importance of ethics, yet our politicians want to play by different rules.
I’d say we need to focus on transparency. Ethics are important, but without transparency, it’s just empty words.
Honestly, even if they change the ethical standards, will it even matter? These politicians never follow them anyway.
That’s a defeatist attitude, Davis. Standards matter precisely because they set a benchmark for what we expect from our leaders.
Maybe so, but actions speak louder than words. Until we see actual change, it’s all talk.
I don’t trust any politician to uphold ethical standards. They are all in it for themselves.
Not all of them, Sandy. There are still some good ones out there trying to make a difference. It’s our job to support them.
I hope you’re right, Ricky. But they are few and far between.
Politicians will always find loopholes. Instead of just ethics, we need better enforcement mechanisms.
This whole debate feels like a distraction from real issues. Let’s focus on what really matters to the people.