Decision on impeachment of 248 ex-MPs 'may not have big impact'

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) started its first hearing on the impeachment case last week when the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) presented the case’s opening statement accusing the 248 ex-MPs.

The NACC accused them of abusing their power by proposing and passing an amendment that contravened the 2007 Constitution on the make-up of the Senate. 

While most suggested that there would be no changes to the political outlook, the move has drawn a variety of responses.

On one side, Sukhum Nuansakul, a political analyst and a former rector of Ramkhamhaeng University, believed the outcome of the impeachment case would be positive for the MPs.

“I don’t believe they will be impeached. In the meeting [on July 15], the former MPs defended themselves very well and were on point. So, It wouldn’t be reasonable to impeach them,” he said.

“Plus, the same standard should be applied to the 248 [after] the 38 ex-senators facing the same charge were not impeached,” he said.

Another political scientist, Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee from Chulalongkorn University, made a similar reference to the case of the 38 former senators.

“The NLA will have to answer to a lot of questions if they don’t spare the 248 this time, when they did [spare] the 38 ex-senators,” she said.

She said the attempt to impeach and ban the former Members of Parliament was extreme and could be viewed as part of a political move to uproot the opposition.

“Thai society in the past 10 years has been trying to play this zero-sum game – where there are outright winners and losers. But it is too extreme and it doesn’t serve the purpose of moving forward. And in the end, both sides will lose,” she said, referring to attempts by political opponents to destroy their rivals.

In regard to the legal aspect, Siripan said she questioned the amendment in its substance. However, she did not see that it breached Article 291 of the 2007 Constitution, and thus, was not unconstitutional, as claimed by the prosecutor – the NACC.

“The revision was not unconstitutional, according to Article 291 of the 2007 Constitution, as it neither undermined democracy nor changed the form of state.

 

‘Amended charter in their favour’

“However, I disagree with the amendment to Article 116 in its substance, as it deviated from the international norms where those putting forward the amendment cannot be the beneficiaries,” Siripan said.

She reiterated that the MPs and the senators proposing and ratifying the draft could have benefited from it, which was not right. It should have been stipulated that the revision took effect during the following term and that the proposers could not run for election. Otherwise, it would appear that they amended the charter in their own favour, she said.

The political scientist also noted the that 2007 Constitution no longer exists. Thus, it could not be a reference post for the wrongdoing, if any. Moreover, the 248 MPs’ membership of the House had expired since it was dissolved in 2013, so, she said, there was no-one to impeach.

“They can’t fire you from a job that you’ve already quit,” Siripan said as an example. 

Attasit Pankaew, a political science lecturer at Thammasat University, saw the case a little differently. He agreed the 248 MPs may not be impeached because their action was against the former constitution, which was no longer in force. However, he said it could still be seen as “political bleaching”.

“Perhaps, they are trying to reform politics by rooting out all the old-faces. But really, these people are not going to lose influence – despite impeachment – as they’ll be sending families and relatives to run in the election for them,” Attasit said.

Currently, a sub-committee has been set up to collect questions from NLA members on the impeachment. In a second meeting on August 6, representatives of the 248 will answer inquiries from the sub-committee. 

The case’s closing statement has to be read no later than August 13, seven days after the inquiry, and the final say on the impeachment will come three days after the closing statement is read.