Pheu Thai has no choice but to bite its lip on retreat

The statement that she read out on the state-run media was largely confusing and went round in circles.
The clearest message may be this part: “I want to plead for the senators, those appointed and those elected, to use their discretion while deliberating the bill. It is well known that the Senate is beyond interference. So I hope the senators will deliberate on the bill on the basis of forgiveness and compassion so as to dispense justice equally for those with grievances and pain.
“The deliberation on amnesty should factor in the country’s interest. Regardless of the outcome of the Senate’s decision, be it to disagree with, to withhold or to revise the bill, I believe the members of Parliament, who cast the vote for the bill’s passage, will accept the result for the sake of national reconciliation.”
The amnesty bill has passed deliberation by the House of Representatives, and it is now up to the Senate to decide whether to reject it.
If the upper house votes against the bill, it will be returned to the lower chamber. However, there is a grace period of 180 days before the House of Representatives can vote on  whether to reaffirm a bill rejected by the Senate, according to the Constitution.
In her statement, the prime minister appeared to avoid making it sound like the government was interfering with the Senate. She seemed to be trying to avoid creating a perception that she was telling the senators to be independent from any political intervention.
However, as it turned out, shortly after the PM made her statement, a group of elected senators led by Senate Speaker Nikom Wairatpanij called a press conference to promise that they would vote to “block” the amnesty bill. They explained that the bill contained some “inappropriate features and flaws”, though some of these very senators had earlier voiced support for the bill.
In the evening, the ruling Pheu Thai Party, which easily managed to push the amnesty bill through the House of Representatives thanks to its majority, also called a press conference to signal that it was retreating following widespread public opposition.
What happened that caused the government, the ruling party and senators to change their stance overnight? One undeniable fact is the widespread public outrage against the amnesty bill from a diverse group of people and organisations. These include the middle class, professional groups and scholars. These people have created enormous pressure against the government.
The ruling politicians appeared to have become aware that they made a wrong assessment about opposition to a blanket amnesty. It was, therefore, wise for them not to stand against the tide, or they could get booted out of power.
However, the ruling party is now in an awkward position. A clear retreat over the matter would not bring them any credit or praise, as the ball is now in the Senate’s court. It is the upper house that will get a hero’s welcome from the public if the senators vote to reject the amnesty bill – and it is now highly likely that most senators will vote against the measure.
Pheu Thai has suffered a lot of political bruising recently, due to infighting in the party and souring ties with its red-shirt supporters, who oppose a blanket amnesty.
The party’s support for the amnesty, which critics say is aimed at whitewashing its patriarch Thaksin Shinawatra’s wrongdoings, has negatively affected its popularity among the electorate.
The ruling party was forced to do something in order to help improve its poor standing. It had to retreat, although it did not actually want to do so.