Bangkok: Teng has not yet agreed on the issue of the senators' demand for an apology, insisting that his post about "12 years since the coup" did not specify any names.
According to Thai News Agency, Nattapong Weerasethakul has yet to commit to addressing the apology demanded by a group of senators. He insists his post "12 Years Since the Coup" did not name names and reiterates his intention was to make Parliament more accountable to the people. He states that if senators disagree with the reduction of the senators' power in the constitutional amendment draft, they have the right to submit their own draft to Parliament. He acknowledges that past Memorandums of Agreement have implications for the present and urges everyone to look forward and address the root causes of drafting a new constitution, arguing that the "blue system" monopolizes politics and the economy, and that the Bhumjaithai Party is merely an agent, while the "blue system" is much larger.
Mr. Nattapong Ruangpanyawut, a list MP and leader of the People's Party (PPP), gave an interview after the shadow cabinet meeting regarding the Senate's planned press conference to respond to accusations of a "blue system" and the three-day apology deadline. He stated that due to the complexity of the press conferences, he hadn't yet reviewed the details and needed to do so. He said he had no objection to the press conference but wanted people to consider the involvement of those making the statement in the final Senate selection process, including their attire and transportation. He added that checking the list of names would clarify the purpose and intention behind the statement. He affirmed that their party aims to make Parliament more accountable to the people. He clarified that the posts didn't name any specific individuals but reflected the public's suspicions, emphasizing their pure intention to ensure parliamentary accountability. He urged the Senate to address any perceived shortcomings in the Senate selection process, specifically the drafting of a new constitution. He highlighted their three key principles: a new constitution that reflects the people's perspective, doesn't grant special privileges to any particular Senate group, and encouraged the Senate to support these three principles.
Regarding the Senate's insistence on maintaining the principle of a one-third majority vote, Mr. Nattapong stated that if the People's Party's draft is not amended, it may be rejected. He explained that political parties and the Senate have the right to propose their own drafts or processes for drafting a new constitution. However, the final method and process must go through the first reading in Parliament and then to the second reading in a committee, where all drafts will be debated. If everyone agrees in the committee, he hopes the Senate will accept it. This would demonstrate sincerity, showing that all Senators are open-minded and not seeking to retain their own power or privileges in the process of drafting the new constitution.
When asked about the pros and cons of the People's Party's statement on May 22nd, which required a one-third vote from the Senate to approve Article 256, and whether the Senate viewed the statement as undermining its power, and whether it would gain Senate support, Mr. Nattapong affirmed that it did not undermine the Senate. He clarified that the People's Party's three principles for amending the constitution, which state that it does not grant special privileges to the Senate, are based on the fact that the process of drafting a new constitution is not the same as amending the existing one. He emphasized that the new constitution should grant equal rights to all sectors of parliament; the party is not curtailing any existing powers. He explained that his communication regarding the "blue regime" was an attempt to show the public and society that a monopolistic political system exists, and he questioned whether the government led by the Bhumjaithai Party is wielding power in the executive branch and whether t his political group has power over the Senate, as the Senate selects independent organizations. He stated that this monopoly undermines checks and balances, leading to a lack of transparency, a rising corruption index, and a corruption rate growing faster than the economy, which is detrimental to citizens and businesses. He added that if the Senate agrees with strengthening checks and balances, it should be more open to the constitutional drafting process to build public trust. It is most widely believed that the Senate did not obstruct the constitutional drafting process.
Regarding the questions directed back at the People's Party about the accusation of a "blue regime," which partly stemmed from the MOU and the People's Party's vote on that day, Mr. Nattapong stated that, firstly, he must acknowledge that the current political situation may have resulted from the People's Party's past political decisions. However, he wanted to emphasize that Thailand's failure lies in its internal weakness, stemming from rampant corruption that is gnawing at the country. The failure of checks and balances is undeniable, particularly in the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which fails to honestly investigate and punish corrupt politicians, as seen in South Korea, or the Office of the Auditor General (OAG), which punishes those who embezzle public funds, leading to buildings collapsing or roads riddled with potholes, thus depriving citizens of a good quality of life. To strengthen Thailand from within, a more rigorous anti-corruption campaign and a robust system of checks and balance s are essential. This inevitably requires amending and drafting a new constitution to strengthen the accountability of oversight agencies to the people, similar to the 1997 constitution which allowed citizens to petition for the removal of independent organizations that failed to perform their duties honestly.
'Therefore, I believe that drafting a new constitution is crucial to elevating the power of the people and increasing transparency in the country. This is why we made those decisions in the past; we saw the root cause of the problem: the country's supreme law was flawed. I acknowledge that past decisions have impacted the current political situation, but I want to invite everyone to look ahead. Currently, Thai politics is like this: we are under a 'blue regime' that is devouring the country, consolidating power in both politics and the economy. The People's Party stands firm on its position and is ready to campaign and communicate to the entire nation that the solution for this country is to place supreme power in the people through the drafting of a new constitution that is most deeply rooted in the people,' said Mr. Nattapong.
Regarding the accusation that the People's Party was partly responsible for creating the "blue regime," Mr. Nattapong emphasized that he acknowledges past decisions led to the current situation, but he believes the "blue regime" is larger than the Bhumjaithai Party. He doesn't deny that past decisions contributed to the current situation, but he believes that under the 2017 Constitution, regardless of which political party governs the country, as long as there is a 20-year national strategy and independent organizations not accountable to the people, there will always be illegitimate powers constantly undermining a democratically elected government. In fact, the Bhumjaithai Party might be at the forefront, an agent within this "blue regime," but if we are to truly create a solution for the country, we must rely on the people and move forward with drafting a new constitution that the majority of the people approve of and accept.
Regarding the claim that the Bhumjaithai Party is an agent, could you specify the components of the "blue regime"? Mr. Nattapong said that he wanted everyone to help analyze and consider the components of the "blue regime." As he had previously stated, he had questioned some senators and the origins of some independent organizations, wondering if they were under the influence of any particular political group. If everyone sees the picture correctly, then we will know what the solution for the country should be.
Regarding the Bhumjaithai Party's release of a timeline for constitutional amendment, is this considered a sign of sincerity? Mr. Nattapong stated that he believes rushing the constitutional amendment process is not the solution. Instead, a well-written draft that is rooted in the people is the answer. The People's Party does not intend to delay or obstruct the process. However, they believe the crucial aspect is the drafting process based on the three principles they previously discussed. This will ensure the creation of the best possible constitution that the people desire. The People's Party may have several options. He acknowledged that, according to Mr. Parit Wacharasindhu, a list MP and deputy leader of the People's Party and chairman of the opposition coordinating committee in the House of Representatives, they have been contacted by both the Pheu Thai and Democrat parties seeking support due to insufficient votes. He affirmed that the People's Party is ready to support any draft that does not contradi ct its principles.