Bangkok, 'Chaithawat' emphasizes that the 'House of Representatives' has complete authority and asks not to make the 'Court' own the 'Constitution', looking at the government's issues and asking for opinions. It just adds clarity, but it's a waste of time. I insist that there should be a referendum. from the first time Use your voice to support the people To fix the 'S.W.' lock.
Date: 11 Dec. 2023 Mr. Chaithawat Tulathon, list of MPs and the leader of the progressive party Discussing ways in which the Pheu Thai Party might propose a draft amendment to the Constitution, Section 256, to create a new constitution. which is contrary to the original decision to find a way to ask the court As the opposition, we support this approach. Or what is your view that the party's stance has advanced? We see that the House has complete power. In amending Section 256 of the Constitution to have members of the Constitutional Drafting Assembly (S.R.), which has been the decision of the Constitutional Court in the past. The Constitutional Court did not rule that this must be done, but recommended that a referendum be held first.
Mr. Chaithawat further said that the party's proposals go far. We proposed a referendum from the beginning. Not because we saw that must follow the interpretation or the decision of the Constitutional Court But we think it's useful politically. No need to waste time. Doing it until you are at the level of a member of the Senate (Senator) will cause you to lose your opportunity. Don't forget that if there is an amendment to the Constitution, Section 256 must be passed by a vote of 1 in 3 of the Senators as well, which has been the case in the past. The Senate has a clear standpoint: If you want to edit the entire version Or amend the Constitution, Section 266, to have the SSO to redo the entire version. There should be a referendum.
Mr. Chaithawat further said that another important dimension is that we can use the opportunity to hold the first referendum. To find a common consensus of the people that Do the majority of the people agree? In order to create political legitimacy with the proposal to amend the constitution to have a SSO. As for issues where there are still different opinions in society. It can be added as a question in the referendum. To find a resolution in different opinions according to the democratic process This has its advantages.
When asked about concerns from the government To the additional questions proposed by the Progressive Party How can a resolution be found? Mr. Chaithawat said that there should be additional questions. It comes from the standpoint and proposals of the Progressive Party. We really want to see a new constitution. Therefore, we do not want to design the main questions to be asked in the referendum. that put in minuscule conditions until the people agreed with the creation of the new constitution But I don't agree with the small questions. Let's vote to disagree. or voting not wanting to vote, so the main question should be a broad question. and have the most common points As for the issue, there are still different opinions. Let's ask at the sub-question. But what will you ask? He thought there was still time to discuss.
When asked about the Pheu Thai Party allowing the Constitutional Court to play a role in this part It will look like a stalling kick. or seem insincere with amending the constitution or not, Mr. Chaithawat said, we may see that Asking the Constitutional Court first It can add clarity to the preparation of the new constitution. Don't look at it in one dimension. But it might take up too much time. He thinks that he must not make the Constitutional Court everything. Own the constitution Because we can use our own judgment. But the important point It is to find a way that will allow us to get more than 1/3 of the votes of the Senate. We can use the votes of the majority of the people in the first referendum to be accepted by the Senate. 312 .-
Source: Thai News Agency