Chaiwat” urges political parties not to delay, to quickly crystallize “amnesty” because the people are waiting, pointing out that in the past there was amnesty under Section 112, saying that the committee’s report is just a study report, asking the government not to worry too much.
Mr. Chaiwat Tulathan, former leader of the Move Forward Party, gave an interview about the 48th anniversary of October 6, 1976, saying that it is an important historical event of Thailand that must be remembered in many dimensions, especially in terms of justice and the responsibility of the state in dealing with the people, which has never happened until today. Violence should not happen again, both in the past and in the future.
Mr. Chaiwat also said that the political amnesty in the October 6 incident had many students and citizens who were prosecuted, including for offenses under Article 112 of the Criminal Code. In 1978, an amnesty law was issued, showing that there had been amnesty in the past. Currently, many politicians
believe that serious political cases are not suitable for amnesty. Therefore, he would like to emphasize that in the past, there had been amnesty under Article 112. This is not strange and has nothing to do with loyalty or disloyalty.
Mr. Chaiwat stated that as a member of the House of Representatives’ Special Committee on the Study of the Amnesty Bill, he is still waiting for clarity on when the committee’s report will be considered as soon as possible after the government leaders decided to postpone the submission of the report from the agenda, possibly due to concerns that they do not want to have politically sensitive issues that would affect the stability of the government. At the same time, there are already 4 amnesty bills on the agenda and he does not want to delay so that political parties can quickly consider submitting their own additional laws.
‘I would like to suggest that we should not be overly concerned. This is a normal agenda for the parliament’s work. Many people are waiting for political
amnesty. Of course, there are significant differences of opinion on whether to grant amnesty for cases under Section 112 or not. The committee’s report proposes several options, thoroughly studying them to see what the pros and cons are of amnesty or the conditions. What are the pros and cons of conditional amnesty? What are the benefits? If the committee can present its report to the parliament as soon as possible, so that political parties can listen to opinions from the parliament and society from all sides, they will be able to reach a conclusion,’ said Mr. Chaiwat.
Mr. Chaiwat said that political parties should quickly crystallize this issue. The committee report is just a study, which is an option, not a draft law. The consideration will be beneficial to the party leaders and the government, and feedback from society will be heard.
Mr. Chaiwat added that the conditional amnesty of Article 112 is one of the options proposed by the committee report, which has received support and consensus from many pol
itical parties, not just one. As for whether political parties, whether Pheu Thai or any other party, will agree or not, the first step is to consider the committee report first, in order to listen to the opinions of members and society. He believes that this will be an easier way for the government and coalition parties to consider how to proceed.
While Mr. Sarayut Jailaek, Secretary-General of the Prachachon Party, added that at present, no political party has invited them to discuss the amnesty issue. As for the Prachachon Party’s preparations, they are in accordance with what Mr. Chaiwat had commented on, which is to wait for the study report of the Special Committee on the Study of the Amnesty Act to be reported to the House of Representatives. After that, the House’s opinions will be informed to the MPs and another draft of the Prachachon Party’s amnesty law will be submitted.
Source: Thai News Agency