'Facesaving' study to
Play
The House committee on laws, justice and human rights yesterday decided to commission a study before drawing a conclusion on who should appoint the military's top brass.
Pheu Thai MP Pracha Prasobdee questioned the legality of the Defence Ministry Administration Act, which sanctions the military appointment process. He wanted the committee to sponsor a motion to repeal or amend the act. But he could not overcome counter-arguments in favour of the act.
The inconclusive debate prompted committee chairman Viroon Phuensaen to launch the study, seen as a face-saving measure for his fellow Pheu Thai lawmaker.
In his arguments, Pracha said the act was passed in the wake of the 2006 coup. He said the passage of the act might not be legal, since the votes in support of it constituted less than a simple majority of the coup-appointed lawmakers.
He also argued that the act might have violated the State Administration Act because its provisions deny the prime minister a say in military appointments. As an elected head of government, the prime minister should be allowed to oversee the dispensing of military assignments, he said.
In a rebuttal, assistant judge advocate Maj-General Niwat Siriphen said the military detected no flaws in the act or its provisions related to the dispensing of assignments.
The legislation was enacted with the intent of separating military and political affairs, he said. The drafting of provisions on the military appointments was initiated by the Thaksin Shinawatra government and completed under the Surayud Chulanont interim administration, he said.
He also pointed out that appointments in the armed forces and the police were separate affairs, rejecting an analogy that the prime minister should oversee the military in the same manner as he or she would have supervision over the police.
In regard to the legislative passage, Senate deputy secretary-general Wararat Atiphaet said the act passed its first reading in October 2007 by 85 votes with one abstention. There was no opposition. On that day, 195 of 249 lawmakers were present.
For the second and third readings, all 85 lawmakers present approved it in a unanimous decision.
Under Parliamentary custom, draft bills are passed by a majority of lawmakers present unless there is a protest demanding a quorum count before the vote, which would then require a simple majority of Parliament.
