Parliament Faces Quorum Crisis as MPs and Senators Withdraw from Constitutional Debate
A joint parliamentary session aimed at examining constitutional amendment bills, intended to establish a Constitutional Drafting Assembly (CDA), faced significant challenges on Friday, resulting in another failure to achieve a quorum.
Numerous MPs and senators chose to abstain from the session, concerned that their participation might conflict with a Constitutional Court ruling mandating a public referendum before such discussions can proceed.
Pheu Thai Party leaders refuted accusations of indecisiveness following the adjournment for the second consecutive day. On Thursday, a key Pheu Thai MP expressed that the ruling coalition feared their legislation could be invalidated due to potential inconsistencies with the Constitutional Court’s ruling, prompting their absence and contributing to the quorum issue.
During a headcount on Thursday, only 204 parliamentarians were present, far below the required attendance of at least half of the 500 MPs and 200 senators.
The session commenced on Friday with Parliament President Wan Muhamad Noor Matha outlining the agenda. However, Pheu Thai MP Cholnan Srikaew voiced concerns over the inadequate number of participants, leading to protests from other members.
President Wan ordered a headcount, which revealed only 175 members present, resulting in another adjournment. Deputy Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai dismissed claims of the Pheu Thai Party playing both sides, urging focus on the current situation.
Phumtham stated that the ongoing discussions regarding constitutional amendments would not jeopardize government stability, emphasizing it was a parliamentary matter rather than a cabinet-sponsored legislative issue.
Concerns about the amendment process potentially violating the constitution have been raised, as the Constitutional Court stipulated in 2021 that a public referendum is required before initiating charter drafting. Mr. Sutin defended the party’s approach, indicating that limiting quorum was a strategy to prevent legislative rejection while seeking judicial clarity.
Dr. Cholnan announced plans to request a court ruling to clarify the constitutionality of the amendment discussions. Meanwhile, People’s Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut criticized the government’s lack of political will to advance the constitutional changes.
Bhumjaithai Party leader Anutin Charnvirakul reiterated a commitment to abstaining from the amendment process due to legal uncertainties surrounding the proposed changes.
Political analysts noted that the architects of the 2017 constitution, appointed by military coup leaders, deliberately designed high barriers to amendments. The two proposed bills from Pheu Thai and the People’s Party both seek substantial constitutional changes contingent on public approval through a referendum.
President Wan defended the inclusion of the bills on the agenda, asserting that should parliament endorse further deliberations, he would consider pausing the process to facilitate a referendum.
The Bhumjaithai Party, along with others, maintains that discussing the matter in parliament prior to holding a referendum could expose participants to legal repercussions.
In the backdrop of this deadlock, the Office of the Constitutional Court issued an infographic clarifying its ruling on parliamentary powers regarding constitutional drafting, which confirms that while parliament has the authority to draft a new constitution, it must first obtain public approval through a referendum before proceeding.
