2023-05-20 14:08:00
“Nipit” warned “go far”, nominated Cheek 112 by asking the Royal Office to file a complaint. It brought the institution as a party to the people, “Kaewsan”, comparing the revised draft with the current one. This is a legal trick.
Very interesting today (May 20, 2023) Mr. Nipit Intarasombat posted a message on Facebook Nipit Intarasombut on the topic “Do not allow the King to be a party to the people” by indicate that
-I listened to the interview of Mr. Teeratchai Pantumas, Legal Department of the Kao Klai Party. and has the name of being the Speaker of the House of Representatives, one of them said that it was necessary to amend Section 112 because the party had previously campaigned for votes and gave several reasons for resolving Article 112, such as amending the penalty rate, amending it to be a compromising law, amending the Office of the Royal Secretariat to file complaints, and removing this matter from the category of state security.
– I have a disagreement. Almost every point of the party is far ahead. Today, let’s put some first.
-Issues to the Office of the Royal Secretariat is a complainant I disagree that giving the royal office notify the public It brings institutions as parties directly to the people. The institute is regarding security. If the public sees Who damaged the institution? It is considered to undermine stability. People should have the right to report complaints. Do not let institutional agencies notify the public of the parties because the institution must rise above the conflict with the people
– Assuming that there is an offense according to Section 112 in a remote village sub-district, the Office of the Royal Traveling to inform in the sub-district, that village?
– fixing this should therefore be clear how to solve Don’t hide
– I’m not a representative with him. There is no privilege of protection for expressing opinions. That’s all you can do. But as a citizen, I still see offenses once morest the institution as offenses once morest state security. The people therefore have the right to protect the institution. Police Department/Prosecutor Will you sue? That’s another matter of fact. So I would like to ask the Kao Farai Party that he has gained power. then asked to use that power to protect the institution Making the institution a party to the people It’s not protection. in my personal opinion It even undermines and destroys the institution. therefore asked the Progressive Party to review/
At the same time, Mr. Kaewsan Atipothi, an academic, published an article in the form of a question-answer on Going further..what to do with 112? The content states that
Q: Today is a long step, he still confirms that he only proposes amendments to 112, not cancels.
Answer: If so, then I have to ask to analyze the show once more to see that In fact, the bill What he had proposed was “cancelled” or “corrected” for sure.
Q: Let me clarify first what is “being 112” in the current criminal law?
Responding to verbal misconduct Go talk to him and damage him. or insult to lose this dignity We have two systems of law. is a protection system for ordinary people with the institutional protection system, for example, if insulting ordinary people, the punishment is only light But if you insult the King Insulting officials, insulting the court, is another system that is considered an offense once morest the land, the prohibitions are more stringent. or heavier punishment because it aims to protect the institution both institutes of the state institution of government and legal institutions
The new law of progress is no longer protecting the King by the institutional protection system to be regarded as ordinary people who happened to be born as the King only When the institutional protection is terminated The protection of ordinary people came in instead. But when it was written, it was a law. have to separate the provisions to set some special conditions of practice
Q: How will the protection of the King from the mouth of the people change? with the law advancing
Answer: It will change like this.
Asked to compare like this The King became an ordinary person with the law moving forward.
Answer: That’s right, from now on, people living in the King will be targeted. It can be damaged by people’s mouths every day. The Bureau of the Royal Household had to hire a contractor for a lawyer’s office to file complaints. Here, Mr. Chuan Leekpai did the right thing. that did not include the bill of the Progressive Act on the agenda of the House of Representatives for reasons that are contrary to the constitution, which states that he is a place of worship no one can violate But if in the future there is actually a new constitution drafted He would probably quit this role too.
Q: Why can’t we criticize the King?
Answer: The monarchy under the constitution is the “consciousness of the country” that is above all parties. Politics come and go The King is not going anywhere We therefore give the royal authority to veto bills. can summon the government to inquire or give advice Important government officials who have initiated must also report to His Majesty. The country is divided and will kill each other. was summoned to talk and stop the riot
All these royal powers will really protect the land must also protect the “prestige” of the King will not be able to criticize each other This is the reason why 112 must be an offense once morest the land. Who does not accept your body like this from the institute? He naturally saw that Section 112 was a law that violated freedom of expression, so the law had to be amended so that His Highness was an ordinary person who might criticize. until he finally got it
Q: I have read the Bill of Progress. Why is he reaching out to amend the defamation and blasphemy law?
Answer: His real goal is to quit 112 so that the King can be framed and criticized like ordinary people. But to make it look good, this is an amendment to the law for freedom of expression. So he reached out to amend the law to reduce the penalty for lese majeste. Insulting officials, insulting the court as well, for example, if defamation of ordinary people The imprisonment of 1 year was lifted until the fine was not more than twenty thousand baht, etc. In the future, anyone who has 20,000 can scold at ease, without fear of going to jail. Disrespect the staff as well. If you have money, you can curse.
Ask. Reach out and reduce the punishment for these offenses. Why let ordinary people scold each other more comfortably? It’s not a promotion of freedom of expression anywhere. Repeal 112 so that critics of the King can be satisfied like ordinary people, isn’t it?
Answer: It is a veil for people to believe that This bill goes a long way towards expanding total freedom. Not only staring at the fall of one institution as they say
This is a legal scam. He really believes that Thai people are still stupid.
1684610327
#Listen #lawyers #Nipit #warns #cheek.112 #Institute #party #NACC
