Somsak bias led to scuffle

Somsak bias led to scuffle

The chaos in parliament on Tuesday during a debate on constitutional amendments could have been avoided had the parliament president, Somsak Kiatsuranant, performed his duties in a straightforward and impartial manner.

Regrettably though, Mr Somsak appeared to have confused his role when he chaired the joint sitting of the Senate and House of Representatives for the second reading debate on charter amendments, which focused on changes to the make-up of the Senate.

He might have thought he was a Pheu Thai MP at heart, and hence did everything for his party's sake.

It should have been clear to Mr Somsak from the beginning that the issue at stake was controversial and all parties involved _ namely the government camp, the opposition and the Senate _ were playing games and trying to outwit each other.

Emotions were high, especially among the Democrats and anti-Thaksin senators. Therefore, keeping the meeting in order to allow the debate to proceed required fair refereeing and broad-mindedness from the chairman of the meeting. But Mr Somsak provided just the opposite.

The trouble flared when Mr Somsak exercised his authority to muzzle 57 senators and Democrat MPs who had earlier reserved their right to debate the issue. He did so by citing a resolution earlier adopted by the majority of the charter amendments scrutiny committee that debate would not be allowed.

He allowed only two representatives from each camp to speak, a move strongly challenged by the opposition and the anti-Thaksin senators.

Had Mr Somsak sincerely wanted the debate to proceed smoothly, he should have permitted most, if not all, the 57 lawmakers to speak instead of clamping down by citing a questionable resolution.

After all, parliament is a symbolic venue of freedom of expression, although there are basic rules and a code of conduct that speakers must follow.

Given the importance of the issue at stake _ which is the election of all senators and the removal of some restrictions about senatorial candidacy _ there was a greater need for more extensive debate so the public could be informed about what is involved, and also about the possible consequences of the charter amendments.

Regrettably, Mr Somsak's arbitrary act not only gagged the opposition lawmakers from speaking out, but also deprived the public of the right to gain access to information that they should know.

The unruly scenes in parliament on Tuesday were shameful, and all opposing camps should be held accountable for their roles in it.

But Parliament President Somsak should bear the full brunt of the blame for not doing his job honestly and with impartiality.

His decision to call in parliament police to restore order in the House followed by his repeated order for the police to have the defiant MPs sit down amounted to pouring fuel on the fire, which provoked uproar among the opposition MPs and senators.

The scene of Mr Somsak being surrounded by more than a dozen parliament policemen gave the misleading impression that he was under threat or at risk of getting hurt.

Topping the shameful list of events were the 150 riot police deployed outside parliament thanks to Mr Somsak's request for police reinforcements. The knee-jerk reaction has raised a big question mark about the need to bring in riot police and their real objective.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (17)