Censure motion sets the scene for further division

This Sunday’s censure and impeachment motions against Justice Minister Pracha Promnok, in his capacity as the director of the Flood Relief Operations Centre, may not result in an Earth-shaking change in the political landscape. But it does show that politicians are at least performing their duty, according to the democratic system, in allowing their counterparts to address serious concerns over flood-relief management.

The opposition Democrat Party filed an impeachment motion against Pracha, and seven other Pheu Thai MPs, saying that Pracha had failed in flood-control efforts and had condoned irregularities in the distribution of relief supplies. The upcoming censure motion tomorrow is likely to be a re-run of the recently concluded general motion, but it promises to add to the intensity of the political debate in the months to come, especially as the government puts forward its planned amnesty bill to Parliament. This debate provides an opportunity for opposition politicians to take up public concerns such as how money has been spent on flood relief.

The movements of the small parties are also worth watching. The censure motion was signed only by Democrat Party MPs, while MPs from other opposition and coalition parties have not signed the motion. In particular, MPs of the Bhum Jai Thai Party, whose de facto leader is Newin Chidchob, and the Matubhum Party of the former coup-leader General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, missed the signing of the censure motion. Sonthi led the coup that ousted the government of then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra on September 19, 2006.

While Pracha will naturally be the centre of the debate, recent incidents including the robbery (allegedly of millions of baht in cash) at the home of suspended Transport Ministry permanent secretary Suphoth Sublom are expected to add more spice to the censure motion. 

Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said earlier during the House debate that, according to the police investigation so far, the money was obtained from corruption involving subway line extensions.

His remark has invited a swift response from the Bhum Jai Thai Party’s Sophon Saram, who was the previous transport minister. Sophon accused Chalerm of fabricating a story about kickbacks in order to divert attention from the government’s failure to control the floods and the Thaksin pardon controversy.

This exchange is simply an overture to what will follow during the censure motion. While it will be interesting to see how the Pheu Thai Party and Bhum Jai Thai Party will handle this issue tomorrow, there is also speculation about whether Bhum Jai Thai will try to patch things up with Pheu Thai after the motion. If that does happen, any shift in political affiliation by Bhum Jai Thai will not come as a surprise. Newin Chidchob used to be a wingman for Thaksin before he switched sides and formed Bhum Jai Thai and supported the Democrat-led coalition during the previous administration. 

A similar situation is said to be happening at Sonthi’s Matubhum Party. This is despite the fact that Sonthi was the coup leader who toppled the Thaksin government. Sonthi recently chaired a House committee meeting on national reconciliation. In the meantime, Chalerm has said the government will put in place an amnesty law that will “restore justice to all parties” who were involved in the political conflict, including Thaksin. 

Sunday’s censure debate may be just a prelude to a real parliamentary war, which promises to erupt as early as the first half of next year, when an amnesty bill is expected to be sponsored by the Yingluck government.

This week’s debate will not only create a forum to allow politicians to address the concerns of the public; instead of letting conflicts worsen on the streets, it will also serve as an indicator for the future political scene. This one-day censure motion may carry more significance than simply defining the future of Pracha.