The National Legislative Assembly voted 190-0 to accept in principle the organic law on the National Human Rights Commission.
If approved in subsequent readings, the existing NHRC members will have to leave office although there is a chance they may reapply as candidates under the new rules.
Meechai Ruchupan, chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee, which wrote the bill, told lawmakers on Friday the bill was based on the 2017 constitution and the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (the Paris Principles) which Thailand ratified.
“The bill proposes that the existing NHRC be dissolved because it has problems. It’s been downgraded mainly because the screening procedure is not open to public participation and not in line with the Paris Principles.
“It doesn’t matter how qualified the members are. The world views it came from the previous constitution. The only way out is to screen for new members.”
The constitution writers’ version of the law stipulates the screening committee consist of representatives from professional groups -- private human rights organisations, lawyers, medical and public health professionals and mass media -- in addition to the Supreme Court chairman, House speaker, opposition leader and the Supreme Administrative Court chairman like in the previous charter.
The debate arising from the planned removal of the existing NHRC centres around its status, which has been changed to an independent organisation by the 2017 constitution. Under the 2014 charter, it is one of the three “constitutional organs” which are not necessarily “independent”.
As an independent organisation, NHRC members can hold positions for only one term and could not re-apply under the new charter. But as a constitutional organ, there is no such restriction.
Mr Meechai said the NHRC was an independent organisation since the 2017 charter was promulgated.
In our view, now that the [2017] constitution came into effect, the NHRC became an independent organisation and its members may not reapply. But it’s up to the Constitutional Court to decide,” Mr Meechai said.