A Pheu Thai Party member on the House committee studying amnesty for political prisoners yesterday supported a proposal to incorporate into the bill offences related to the lese majeste (LM) law. Somkid Chueakong, spokesman of the House special committee, expressed optimism that extending an amnesty bill to cover Section 112 of the Criminal Code would not be a formidable challenge.
His comments came after Chaithawat Tulathon, leader of the main opposition Move Forward Party (MFP), voiced concerns that pushing to include the LM law could prove more complicated, especially with former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra being recently indicted on an LM offence.
Mr. Somkid, a former Pheu Thai MP for Ubon Ratchathani, now serves as a deputy secretary-general for political affairs to Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin. He mentioned that the proposal to include Section 112 offences in the bill had garnered support from several committee members, and emphasized that these developments predated the announcement of Thaksin’s indictment.
On May 29, the attorney-general announced Thaksin’s indictment on lese majeste and computer crime violations stemming from a 2015 interview he gave to a South Korean newspaper. Thaksin has been ordered to appear at the Office of the Attorney-General on June 18.
“Now, with Thaksin facing a lese majeste charge, Pheu Thai finds itself in an awkward situation,” Mr. Somkid remarked. “Pheu Thai never rejected the idea of including Section 112 offences in the amnesty bill. If these offences are included, the amnesty could progress through the legislative process.”
He asserted that if the amnesty bill is passed, anyone facing a lese majeste charge, including Thaksin, could potentially benefit from it. Mr. Somkid dismissed accusations that Pheu Thai supported the inclusion of Section 112 offences merely to exonerate Thaksin.
Nikorn Chamnong, secretary-general of the House committee, emphasized that no definitive conclusions had been made regarding whether Section 112 offences should be included in the amnesty bill. He noted that the committee has until mid-July to make a decision, and pointed out that his Chartthaipattana Party opposed including LM violators in the bill.
Defence Minister and Pheu Thai list-MP Sutin Klungsang stated that the amnesty bill should consider opinions from the Defence Council and other security organizations before being submitted to parliament, as it is a security law. He also stressed the importance of Pheu Thai listening to the views of its coalition partners on this matter.
Including lese majeste (LM) offenses in the amnesty bill is a no-go. This will just let political figures like Thaksin off the hook without facing any consequences for their actions.
You have a point, Sara. But isn’t the LM law too restrictive? People should have the right to criticize public figures without facing harsh penalties.
James, I agree freedom of speech is important, but when it comes to lese majeste, we’re talking about the monarchy. It’s not like criticizing a regular public figure.
Sara, questioning authority should be part of any healthy democracy. These laws are outdated and stifle political discourse.
If Thaksin benefits from this bill, it will only deepen the divide in Thai society. Some people will see it as blatant corruption.
Tara, every law or bill can have unintended consequences. The goal should be to better the country, not worsen tensions.
It’s about time someone spoke up for Thaksin! He’s been targeted excessively. This amnesty bill could finally bring some justice to the situation.
Are you serious? Thaksin’s crimes are well documented. An amnesty bill shouldn’t be used to benefit one person.
But isn’t it odd that the LM charge came right when the bill is being discussed? Coincidence? I think not.
Even if we consider Thaksin’s case, we should also think about other political prisoners who could benefit from this amnesty.
Why is this even a debate? LM laws should be scrapped altogether. They don’t belong in a modern democracy.
Phineas, LM laws are there to protect the monarchy, which is an integral part of Thai culture and history. We can’t just scrap them.
June, cultures evolve. Why should we cling to old laws that don’t fit today’s world?
Well, Tom, it’s not that simple. The monarchy represents stability for many people. Sudden changes can lead to more instability.
I really think this bill should not be extended to LM cases. It was not designed for those who commit such serious offenses.
Isn’t the whole point of an amnesty bill to offer a second chance? Why exclude LM cases? It seems arbitrary.
David, there’s a difference between political prisoners and those who insult the monarchy. We can’t treat these cases the same.
Can we trust Pheu Thai’s motives here? It seems too convenient that this pushes Thaksin’s interests.
Absolutely, Olivia! There’s definitely something fishy about the timing.
The inclusion of LM offenses in the amnesty bill could make people feel the government is undermining the law that’s supposed to protect the monarchy.
Anan, the government should focus on fair laws, not outdated ones. If people feel oppressed, new laws can help us move forward.
Pheu Thai should prioritize healing political rifts in the country. An amnesty bill excluding LM cases would be better accepted.
Why not have a separate bill to address LM cases? Bundling them with other political offenses will just muddy the waters.
Thaksin brought so much trouble; he doesn’t deserve any special treatment. We must set boundaries.
Every law should be evaluated on its merits. If it serves justice, it should include all political prisoners, LM cases, or not.
I’m a foreigner, but shouldn’t everyone in a democracy be allowed to question their leaders, even their monarchy?
Tony, Thai values are different. The monarchy is deeply respected here. Foreigners might find it hard to understand this.
Conveniently including LM in the bill just to save Thaksin seems way too orchestrated to me. This stinks of political gamesmanship.
Think about the other political prisoners too. Not everything is about Thaksin. Many people are jailed unfairly under this law.
It’s frightening how polarizing Thaksin’s case is. The amnesty bill should be discussed separately from individual cases to cool temps.
Regardless of one’s opinion on LM, it’s clear that the current political climate in Thailand needs more healing and reconciliation. This bill could be a step in the right direction.