Amnesty is just a report of the results of the study.

Chusak", Minister attached to the Prime Minister's Office, reiterated that the amnesty is only a report of the results of the study, not a step in drafting the law, asking the House to move forward. Mr. Chusak Sirinil, Minister attached to the Prime Minister's Office, talked about the consideration of the study of the amnesty bill, saying that he personally wanted the report to be submitted to the parliament for consideration and consideration of what to do. In yesterday's debate, he tried to explain it many times because there were still misunderstandings on many issues. He didn't really understand or pretended not to understand, for example, there was still a misunderstanding that it was about the repeal of Section 112. He repeatedly emphasized that it was not, but rather about considering amnesty in political situations at a certain time, which had already happened many times, and he confirmed that it was not an intrusion and he had never thought of it that way. In yesterday's debate, many people said th ey did not want Sections 110 and 112, which were drafting laws, so it must be clear that there was no such issue. At present, it is only a study report with various opinions. As for the coalition parties not wanting to include the amnesty issue in this report, Mr. Chusak said that if we look at it that way, we will not be able to say anything in this society. What I said is just my opinion and study. As for what to do next, the meeting can only acknowledge the report, which does not mean that we agree or disagree with the report. Once we acknowledge it and have comments, we must send it to the responsible agency and the cabinet meeting for consideration before the council passes a resolution to send it to the relevant agency. If there is a resolution not to send it, that is their right. However, I personally think that the matter should be brought to the meeting next week for consideration because I want to finish the process and want to talk and understand each other. As for whether to talk at the coalition party dinner on October 21, it depends on the executives to decide whether to talk or not. When asked if there are parties who agree and disagree, will this matter not go anywhere, Mr. Chusak reiterated that there should be acknowledgement, and if it is seen that it should not be sent to the relevant agencies, then it does not need to be sent. Mr. Chusak added that if the political parties are aware of the report, they will know what is what or what their opinions are, and asked them to discuss it in the legal consideration stage. However, he did not know when the whip would bring this matter to the meeting. It is not that he did not know the future, but in general, it had to be considered. As for whether the House agrees to withdraw, can it be done? Mr. Chusak asked back, what is the purpose of withdrawing? What will happen if it is withdrawn? And he has never seen that when the report is sent to the meeting and approved, but until now, there has only been acknowledgement before the vote in order to send it to the relevant agencies. And if the meeting sees that it should not be forwarded, will it be considered as closing the door on amnesty? It is still a report pending in the House. Whoever wants to raise it for consideration and study can do so. It is the right of the political party. In terms of law, whether to agree or disagree is up to them. Source: Thai News Agency