|
|
|
|
|
|
 September 2019 : Panel Voted to Ban 3 Hazardous Chemicals
Panel committee voted to ban 3 hazardous chemicals On 24 September, the parliament’s extraordinary committee unanimously voted to ban the use of three toxic farming chemicals- paraquat, glyphosate and chlorpyrifos- and setting up a working group to address the public on their dangers. Following the resolution, the committee will invite four relevant ministers; Agriculture and Co-operations, Industry, Commerce and Public Health to hear their opinions. These three chemicals had been banned in 53 countries including Lao, Cambodia and Vietnam. “Big Pom” uncertain Bangkok bombing relates to politics On 24 September, Deputy PM Gen. Prawit Wongsuwan, aka “Big Pom”, remarked on a progress of an investigation on the serial bombing in Bangkok in August that arrest warrants have been issued on the offenders but they had fled the country through Thai-Malaysian border. He said currently there is no evidence the bombing relates to any political faction due to the offenders are still on the run. However, there might be any clue if they are arrested. CC ruled “Prayut” was not state officer On 18 September, the Constitutional Court unanimously ruled Gen. Prayut Chan-ocha was not a state official when he performed the prime minister’s function after the 22 May 2014 coup. The case was launched by the House Speaker, following a petition signed by 110 MPs from seven oppositions parties, asking the CC to determine whether Prayut’s prime ministership terminates in regards to Section 170 paragraph 1 (4), Section 160 (6) and Section 98 (15) of the Constitution due to he was a state official. Section170. The ministership of an individual Minister terminates upon (4) being disqualified of being under any of the prohibitions under section 160. Section 160. A Minister must (6) not be under any of the prohibitions under section 98. Section 98. A person under any of the following prohibitions shall be the person who is prohibited from exercising the right to stand for election in an election of Members of the House of Representatives (15) being an official or an employee of a government agency, State afency, or State enterprise or other State official. The CC reasoned Gen. Prayut was not a state official when he was the chief of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), when seized power in 2014. The NCPO chief was not under the command or supervision of the state, and the position was not appointed by any laws. The NCPO chief held an interim role in maintaining peace and order. In the light of this, the postion of the NCPO chief was not the same as personnel or employees of state agencies, state enterprises, and/or other kinds of state officials under Section 98(15) of the constitution. The court also cited a past ruling in 2000, which summarizes the criteria which must be met to be regarded as a state official: appointed and/or elected by law; having the authority and duty to enforce laws and perform routine functions; being under the command or supervision of the state; and receiving a regular wage or salary. CC dismissed Prayut’s oat petition On 11 September, the Constitutional Court unanimously voted it had no authority to consider the issue on Prime Minister Prayut Chan-ocha and his ministers failure to recite the complete oath of office. The petition was lodged by Panupong Churak, a Ramkhamhaeng University student, to the ombudsman on Aug 20. Mr Panupong argued incomplete oath by the prime minister affected his rights under the constitution. Section 213 provides for a complaint by someone who believes their constitutional rights were violated. Gen. Prayut took the oath before His Majesty the King on July 16. The prime minister failed to complete the oath as he omitted the final sentence during the swearing-in. On Aug 27, the King summoned Gen. Prayut and all cabinet members to receive a message, in which His Majesty gave them moral support and asked the government to perform its duty as pledged in the oath of allegiance. The court also rejected a petition by former member of the dissolved Thai Rakas Chart Party, Ruangkrai Leekitwattana, on the same issue. Measures to solve Student Loan Fund debts On 15 September, Secretary of the Parliament Mr. Isara Seriwatthanawut disclosed that Mr. Chuan Leekpai , President of the House of Representatives aware on the problem of the liquidity of the Student Loan Fund (SLF) due to some graduates refuse to repay debts after the 2-year grace period ended. While some of them are still unemployed, others do not repay even though they are civil servants. Among them 166 are working in the Office of the Secretariat of the House of Representatives. Mr. Chuan gives policy that the office administration should deduct their monthly salaries to repay the loan, making a total deduction of 206,070 baht. He also advised state agents should add more rules for the selection of office staffs. They must not be a person not repaying SLF since officials must be qualified academically and morality. Moreover, King Prajadhipok Institute board members resolved on 2 September to add that SLF non-pay persons are disqualified to both the participants and graduates. Mr. Chuan initiated SLF in 1992 when he was the prime minister with key objective to lessen education inequality by providing loans; tuition fees and other necessary expenses, to needed students. Court upholds jail for red-shirt protesters On 11 September, the Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the two lower courts, sentencing red-shirt member Arisman Pongruangrong and 11 others to four years in prison over the riot that shut down the 2009 Asean Summit in Pattaya. Another defendant, Somyos Promma, was acquitted. The court ruled he was only a protester taking part, not an organizer of the raid. A The ruling was read out in the Pattaya Provincial Court in Pattaya, where the attack took place. Thailand was the Asean chairman at the time and the summit was hastily cancelled due to the incursion by the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) members determined to oust then-prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. In its ruling, the court found all 12 defendants guilty as charged for their roles in the protest at the Royal Cliff Beach Hotel, which forced the hasty evacuation of regional leaders and the postponement of the summit. Sakda Noppasit, the deputy secretary-general of the Pheu Chart Party, was the only defendant in the courtroom for the ruling. The court issued arrest warrants for the others to serve their jail terms. CC ruled HRC “set-zero” constitutional On 4 September, the Constitutional Court ruled, on the majority, that the Homan Rights Commission (HRC) term ended on the day the current Human Right Act enforced but they can perform functions until the new commissioners take over. The case was submitted by the Central Administrative Court on an argument by Mr. Wat Tingsamit, the chairman of the Human Rights Commission, asking the court to consider whether the Organic Act on the National Human Rights Act 2017, Section 60 paragraph one and paragraph two contrary to or inconsistent with Article 3, Article 26 and Article 27 of the Constitution. Appeal Court added 6 years to Boonsong jail term On 6 September, the Supreme Court added another six years to the jail sentence of former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom, bringing the total to 48 years for his involvement in corrupt government-to-government rice contract. The decision by the court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions was part of a ruling on an appeal filed by Boonsong, former deputy commerce minister Poom Sarapol and 26 other defendants after he was sentenced to 42 years by the same court on Aug 25,2017. In the 2017 ruling, the court found that the G2G contracts to export pledged rice to China were fabricated and in fact involved sales of the pledged rice to private companies in Thailand, which in turn sold them to a third party. Court accepted petition on 32 MPs media shares On 4 September, the Constitutional Court accepted a petition filed against 32 opposition MPs for allegedly holding shares of firms which might run media business, yet their legislative duties have not been suspended, pending court rulings. The petition was lodged by a Palang Pracharath Party MP against the 33 Pheu Thai Party and Future Forward Party MPs for allegedly holding sharea of firms which might run media business which is prohibited by the constitution for legislators. However the court found the 29th alleged Mr. Wuttinand Boonchoo incompliance with the prohibitions, therefore, he was acquitted. |
 |
