Latest news with #WichaiSutsawat
Bangkok Post
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Bangkok Post
MPs back amnesty bills
The House has passed three amnesty bills but rejected two versions submitted by civil society groups and the former Move Forward Party during their first readings. The three bills, also known as the "Promote Peaceful Society Bill", were proposed by different parties. The first was put forward by United Thai Nation (UTN) MP Wichai Sutsawat. This was accepted by 299 MPs with 172 abstentions. The second bill sponsored by Klatham Party MP Preeda Boonplerng, formerly from Khru Thai Party, was approved by 311 MPs with 158 abstentions. The third, backed by Bhumjaithai Party (BJT) leader Anutin Charnvirakul, passed with 311 votes of support, three against and 147 abstentions. The two that did not pass were the People's Party's "Amnesty for Political Offences Bill" and the "People's Amnesty Bill", which was backed by 36,723 signatories and Poonsuk Poonsukcharoen. The PP's bill was rejected by 319 MPs, accepted by 147, with six abstentions while the civil society network-sponsored bill was rejected by 306 votes and accepted by 149, with 20 abstentions. A 32-member committee was set up to study the three approved bills, with the UTN-sponsored one being used as the primary version for further deliberation. A source close to the matter said all three shared a key principle that they offer no amnesty for offenders of the lese majeste law, or Section 112 of the Criminal Code, while the rejected bills were viewed as potentially offering amnesty to those charged under Section 112. Before the vote, Wichai Sudsawat, a UTN MP for Chumphon, insisted the party-backed bill was not aimed at benefiting the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) as some critics claimed, but was designed to foster national unity. The party was widely seen as being connected to the now-dissolved group whose mass demonstrations against the former Yingluck Shinawatra administration led to the 2014 coup. Yingcheep Atchanont, manager of the Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw), criticised the exclusion of lese majeste offences, saying the law had been abused to silence dissent. "Passing an amnesty law for one's group while labelling others for life doesn't build a peaceful society," he said. Paradorn Prisnanantakul, a BJT MP for Ang Thong, said many lese majeste defendants were repeat offenders and granting them amnesty could spark more confrontations. "We believe these offenders can seek a pardon. And when the House has different views on the matter, including the lese majeste offence may reignite conflict and unrest," he said. PP leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut said the party would continue to push for the adoption of a broad amnesty bill despite the House of Representatives rejecting the two drafts submitted by the party and the network of civil society groups. The party will use the scrutiny process to advocate for an inclusive bill. He said the PP MPs would work in the committee to prevent any discriminatory laws, and if the final version of the amnesty bill fails to cover all sides, the party would not support it. Mr Natthaphong said an amnesty bill could pass its third and final reading despite speculation of an early House dissolution, adding the main opposition party is prepared to propose key bills regardless. Sasinan Thamnithinan, a PP MP for Bangkok, defended the party's bill, saying it did not contradict the core principles of the others and did not automatically grant amnesty to lese majeste offenders. She urged MPs under pressure not to reject the bill but to abstain to allow further discussion. Progressive Movement member Pannika Wanich wrote on Facebook that for the PP to push a broad political amnesty, it must secure at least 250 House seats in the next election. "I'll remember this day. Amnesty is meant to resolve political conflict, not to grant pardons only to PDRC and yellow-shirt demonstrators.
Bangkok Post
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Bangkok Post
MPs take up amnesty proposals
The House of Representatives on Wednesday began intense deliberations on five bills to foster social harmony and grant amnesty for political offences, submitted by MPs and citizen groups. Opening the session, Deputy Speaker Pichit Chuamuangphan presided over the presentation of the bills: the "Promote Peaceful Society Bill" by MP Wichai Sutsawat (United Thai Nation Party); "Promote Peaceful Society Bill" by MP Preeda Boonplerng (Klatham Party); "Amnesty for Political Offences Bill" by the People's Party (PP); the "People's Amnesty Bill" backed by 36,723 voters and Poonsuk Poonsukcharoen; and "Promote Peaceful Society Bill" by Bhumjaithai Party leader Anutin Charnvirakul -- a late submission. During the debate, PP list-MP Rangsiman Rome called for a broad, non‑discriminatory amnesty, citing abuse of Section 112 of the Criminal Code or the lese‑majeste law to silence dissent. He said the PP-sponsored bill omits specific offences and deadlines, entrusting a central committee -- comprising judiciary, parliamentary, and government representatives -- to vet eligible cases. The measure does not set a cutoff date for such cases. He said the bill is designed this way because, historically, the state has used "legal warfare" to target citizens with dissenting political views. This includes harsh application of laws such as Section 112, as well as minor infractions like public cleanliness laws or failure to carry an ID card, to harass political opponents. "In many Section 112 cases, state officials have filed charges without examining the facts, evidence, or ensuring fairness, which only deepens conflict," he said. By contrast, Bhumjaithai MP for Ang Thong, Paradorn Prisnanantakul, said his party firmly believes those who violated Section 112 cannot be granted amnesty. "Doing so could spark new unrest and prolong protests. If a full amnesty isn't possible, then at least some groups should benefit. We must remove certain elements from the equation to move forward," he said. Mr Paradorn acknowledged that some individuals would not benefit from the bill, but expressed hope that in the future -- once society is more open to dialogue and those individuals show remorse -- the issue could be revisited.
