The joint parliamentary session aimed at bridging the political divide turned into a slanging match yesterday with government and opposition MPs trading accusations and pointing fingers over Bangkok's Songkran mayhem.
PM’s Office Minister Sathit Wongnongtoey briefs Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, left, as Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva glances upward during the joint parliamentary debate on the Songkran mayhem yesterday. NATTHITI AMPRIWAN
Analysts said the two-day debate had been a real disappointment so far and slammed the lawmakers for putting their own interests first in their speeches instead of brainstorming to find solutions to the country's political crisis.
Sombat Chantornvong, a political scientist at Thammasat University, said the MPs stood by their own agendas and used parliament as their forum.
"This clearly shows no one intends to use parliament as a forum to solve the political problems," he said.
"What happened in the parliament today [yesterday] clearly stresses the need for political reform ... which must start with MPs considering if they have performed their duties well."
Siriphan Noksuan Sawasdee, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University, said the debate was a disappointment because MPs had hardly proposed any concrete solutions and had traded charges which simply served to compound the social divisions.
"When the nation is in a crisis, [they] should cooperate to find ways out," Mrs Siriphan said. "People want to see collective attempts to find solutions in a democratic fashion where parliament is used as a forum for the public interest, not any individual's interests."
Trakul Meechai, another political scientist from Chulalongkorn University, said opposition MPs used the joint House-Senate session to speak in favour of red shirt protesters and the session was mostly taken up by arguments.
"The debate worsens the hatred between the two sides because most opposition MPs seemed to tell the red shirt demonstrators - who have ended their protest - on television that soldiers hurt people. This parliamentary session widens the rift," Mr Trakul said.
Thawee Suraritthikul, a political scientist from Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University, said the session not only failed to find a solution but also provided a hint that political reform would fail in the future because both government and opposition MPs had proven they were not ready to cooperate.
He said the person behind the opposition might have planned to show that parliament could not function and thus force Abhisit Vejjajiva to resign as prime minister. He was apparently referring to Thaksin Shinawatra.
He said he hoped Mr Abhisit was aware of the ploy.
In parliament, leading Puea Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung accused the prime minister of exercising the Executive Decree on Public Administration in Emergency Situations illegally.
He said Mr Abhisit had failed to ask the cabinet to endorse the use of the decree within three days as required by law.
Mr Abhisit declared a state of emergency in Bangkok and surrounding provinces on April 12.
Although the emergency rule was declared after red shirt protesters had blocked main Bangkok streets, Mr Chalerm said the road blockades were not serious.
Puea Thai MP Somchai Phetprasert accused the government of using excessive military force to crack down on unarmed protesters.
The joint meeting started with Mr Abhisit urging lawmakers from both sides to resolve the conflict.
"Today is the day we decide if we will use [parliament] to heal the wounds of society, or to be another part of the conflict," he said.
He insisted the state of emergency was necessary as the red shirt protesters had shifted from peaceful to violent protest. He then set out how the incidents had developed.
He said the protesters had laid siege to the Criminal Court, set rewards for the capture of government figures and tried to catch and kill him in their repeated attacks on his motorcade.
There were protesters who had honestly wanted to express their political beliefs but protest leaders and some other demonstrators used violent means which were unconstitutional.
Mr Abhisit said it was necessary to maintain emergency rule in Bangkok and surrounding provinces, citing police reports on the activities of red shirt leaders. He said some had even told the foreign media that future protests might resort to the use of weapons.
"Now there are attempts from some groups of people who do not want the conflicts to end," Mr Abhisit said.
He voiced concern about rumours that the military crackdown on rioters last week caused deaths, saying such lies could reignite social unrest.
"Claims based on still and motion pictures that protesters were killed in the crackdown have proven to be groundless. These are dangerous because some groups of people will use these as an excuse.
"This is like the eve of a war and we risk losing our democracy."
Mr Abhisit explained that the emergency rule was aimed at protecting the public, the rule of law and the constitutional monarchy and the use of the executive decree would not cause any damage to the lives or property of the public.
Source: Bangkok Post
No comments:
Post a Comment