Wan Noor defends decision to adjourn Parliament
Parliament President Wan Muhamad Noor Matha defended his decision to adjourn Parliament on Friday, by saying he was only performing his duty.
Wan Noor, who also doubles as House speaker, on Saturday dismissed allegations that the adjournment had come too early, adding that his decision was unbiased and he had taken no sides.
The House speaker was speaking to reporters at Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi International Airport, before taking a flight to Indonesia.
Wan Noor and several Thai MPs and senators headed to Jakarta to attend the 44th meeting of the Asean Inter-parliamentary Assembly (AIPA).
The joint parliamentary meeting on Friday was originally intended for MPs and senators to vote on a PM candidate from Pheu Thai Party. However, Wan Noor postponed the vote after the Constitutional Court rescheduled its decision on whether to accept a petition challenging Parliament’s July 19 decision to block the renomination of Move Forward leader Pita Limjaroenrat as PM candidate. The decision has been postponed to August 16.
Remaining on the agenda was Move Forward’s draft bill seeking to amend the Constitution’s Article 272, which gives senators the power to vote for a prime minister.
When the meeting began, Move Forward MP Rangsiman Rome proposed a motion for the Parliament to review its resolution to reject Pita’s renomination after he failed to secure majority support in the July 13 vote.
Wan Noor, who was chairing the meeting, rejected Rangsiman’s motion and explained that if Parliament proceeded with the motion, it may breach the Constitutional Court’s power.
The next 30 minutes or so saw an argument between Move Forward MPs and senators regarding the merit of a motion seeking a review of a parliamentary resolution. Some senators even proposed a counter-motion.
After half an hour of inconclusive debate, Wan Noor declared the meeting adjourned.
He said on Saturday that this is the first time in his four decades of experience in Parliament, that he has seen a rejected motion being reviewed.
“I didn’t adjourn the meeting abruptly. Postponing the Parliament meeting was the best way out for the country. We must wait for a Constitutional Court decision because the Constitution is the country’s highest law,” he said.
The speaker explained that if Parliament went ahead with Rangsiman’s motion, which involved the selection of a prime minister, and the Constitutional Court issues a verdict on August 16 that is contrary to the parliamentary resolution, there may be damage to many people involved, including himself.
