Prawit was speaking after an amendment to the MP election bill was passed Thursday night by the National Legislative Assembly. The amendment, to delay implementation of the bill for 90 days beyond its proclamation, is expected to delay the vote to as late as February rather than the previously announced November deadline.

“There is no problem,” said Prawit. “It’s good [that they have passed the bill] because people keep asking when the election will be held.”

However, he declined to comment on a remark that the passage of the bill would result in the roadmap being delayed, saying the NLA had decided on the matter and so no further questions were needed.

Prawit also said there was no need to explain the move to the international community, which has repeatedly shared its concern over Thailand being governed by a military junta since 2014.

The international community wished to see the election held, and it would be, said Prawit. It has just been delayed for three months, he said. It is clear that no further delay would take place, and the current delay still follows what was permitted under the charter.

The deputy PM said he could see no reason to further impact the election timing.

If the situation is calm and procedures are followed, the junta would consider lifting the political ban, he added.

Prawit also rejected the notion that the junta exerted pressure on the NLA to delay the election timing. The bill originated with and was passed by the NLA, which considered the amendment into the night, he said.

NLA president Pornpetch Vichitcholchai called a 20-minute break and asked legislators to discuss the issue privately and try to settle down before the meeting resumed.

The Constitution Drafting Commission had envisioned 20 professional groups, but some legislators sought to reduce the number, fearing there could be bloc voting.

The NLA must also decide how to divide the group after agreeing on the number in Article 11.

The Senate bill is the last of 10 organic laws being deliberated. A deadline for its passage was set for today.

THE DEPUTY premier in charge of the government’s legal affairs said yesterday that Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha had not signed any treaty committing him to hold the next election in November this year.

Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam’s comments came as the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) debated the controversial move to delay by three months the enforcement of the MP election law, which potentially could delay the election.

During several hours of debate, most NLA members agreed that a 90-day postponement was in keeping with the current circumstances. Some lawmakers suggested a longer period of postponement while others opposed any delay.

Wissanu yesterday said Prayut had “just made a remark” when speaking about the tentative election schedule during his visit to the United States in October last year. “No treaty was signed. If he had to sign any agreement, the prime minister would have needed approval from the Cabinet.

And he may have to inform the National Legislative Assembly, too,” he added.

The deputy PM was speaking at Government House during his meeting with a large group of editors, columnists and reporters. He said “unforeseen factors” like the 90-day delay in the election law’s enforcement certainly would affect the original “road map” under which the next election was tentatively scheduled for November. But he did not think a delay could be viewed as “breaking a promise”. The deputy PM said foreign countries should understand that logic “unless they pretend not to get it”.

Earlier, the US and the European Union separately called on the Thai government to comply with the road map and the November schedule promised by Prayut. Legislators yesterday spent many hours discussing the postponement of the election law’s enforcement.

Some NLA members proposed a postponement of 120 or 280 days despite criticism that they were helping the junta stall the election. The issue was part of the stipulation in the MPs election bill, which was in the Assembly for the second and third readings. The deliberations started at 9.30am, but the NLA had not started voting on the second reading as of press time.

The deadline for passage of the law is today, 60 days after the bill was submitted by charter drafters. The majority of the law-vetting committee insisted that without an enforcement delay, political parties would have difficulty making arrangements in time.

There were several arrangements that political parties had to make to ensure their eligibility to run in the elections, the legislators argued. For instance, they had to hold primary elections and handle member registrations as required by law, they said.

Seree Suwanpanon, a member of the committee, reiterated there were many things political parties had to get done before the election. The amendment to give them 90 extra days was well considered and aimed at helping the parties, he said. “There wouldn’t be enough time if we stuck to the previous stipulation. Parties wouldn’t be able to field candidates and then they would just blame us for having neglected this,” Seree said.

He also insisted the enforcement delay had not been ordered by the junta, calling it “a rational choice”. Some legislators, such as Taweesak Sukawatin, proposed that enforcement of the law be delayed for 120 days. That would ensure not only the political parties but also Election Commission would have time to prepare for the poll, he said. The EC might face new challenges such as online campaigning, he said, adding that 120 days would be better as it would not be too tight, reducing the pressure.

Meanwhile, a minority of the vetting committee – mainly from the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) – stuck to their view that the immediate enforcement of the election law would still give political parties enough time. CDC member Prapan Naigovit said the CDC considered 150 days provided for all sectors, as stipulated in the Constitution, was already flexible and sufficient for everyone to get ready for the national poll. Previous charters provided only 90 days, he added.

Aside from the controversial delay in the enforcement, the NLA meeting yesterday also spent considerable time debating whether to ban people failing to exercise their voting rights from working in some areas in the government sector such as in Parliament. Some said the punishment would encourage voters to turn up while others viewed it as an infringement of rights. Some legislators argued that “no” vote could be a form of political expression, too.

They should not be punished for such an action, they said. Another heated debate surrounded the stipulation on whether to allow recreation activities as part of the election campaign. One side said it could lead to vote buying and corruption, while the other pointed out that it was an incentive to draw people to participate in politics.

Meanwhile, Democrat Party deputy leader Ong-art Klampaiboon said there was a hidden agenda behind the legislators’ postponement of the MPs election law’s enforcement. He added that the move by the committee vetting the bill was “unusual”. “People disagree with the postponement because they suspect a hidden agenda,” the veteran politician said, adding that “this cunning plot” was not necessary, as the new law could be allowed to take effect normally.

The members voted 213 to zero with four abstentions.

The bill was passed after almost 14 hours of deliberations on Thursday.

In the second reading of the bill, the stipulation deferring its enforcement by three months after the law is published in the Royal Gazette was passed with 196 votes for, 12 against, and 14 abstentions.

As a result of the new law, the next election, tentatively scheduled for November this year, could now be delayed until February next year.

The majority of the law vetting committee members reasoned that political parties needed the additional time to make changes in accordance with the new regulations. For instance, they would need to hold primary elections. Also, new members would not be eligible to contest in the election unless their membership was at least 90 days old, the legislators argued.

Some NLA members proposed an even longer postponement – by 150 to 180 days.

The lawmakers also spent considerable time debating punishment for those failing to exercise their voting rights, as well as the appropriateness of using entertainment in election campaigns.

The law vetting committee had proposed that voters who did not exercise their franchise should be disqualified from serving in some areas of the government sector such as in Parliament.

The legislators, however, disagreed, saying the punishment was disproportionate and deprived people of their rights. Not voting was not necessarily a lack of interest in politics but could be a way of expressing discontent, they argued.

The NLA eventually voted to only take away their right to appoint political officials and heads of local administration offices.

The NLA also voted to allow entertainment or recreational activities during election campaigns, but capped the spending on such activities at 20 per cent of the total campaign budget.

The charter drafters had sought a ban on entertainment activities in election campaigns, arguing it could be used for vote-buying and corruption.

Other legislators viewed it as an attraction to draw people to take part in political activities.

Following the passage of the bill, it would now be sent to the Election Commission and the Constitution Drafting Commission for review. After getting their nod, it would be sent to Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha to seek royal endorsement.

If the two commissions disagreed, a joint committee would be set up to revise the law.

The NLA is also deliberating the organic bill on the composition of the Senate today. It was the last one of the 10 organic laws.

Vorachai said the issue was not under the NACC’s authority. The anti-graft body’s pursuit of the case amounts to an attempt to override the higher authority of the legislative body that the MPs were elected to sit in, he said.

Vorachai said the bill the MPs had pushed for did not yield any benefits to anyone, contrary to people’s fears.

The amnesty bill was among several bills pushed in late 2013 before the military coup. Opponents alleged that the proposed legislation was intended to benefit certain figures including self-exiled former PM Thaksin Shinawatra.

One of the 40 MPs has filed a lawsuit demanding compensation from the NACC.

The court will hear the first testimony on the case in February.

DEPUTY Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan would not be required to declare his extravagant watch collection as assets under the anti-graft law if the watches did not belong to him, National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) secretary-general Worawit Sukboon said yesterday.

At an NACC press briefing yesterday, Worawit said that if the watches belonged to Prawit, he would have to explain when he obtained them.

If Prawit had obtained the watches before he took government office, he would have to explain why he had failed to list them in his assets declaration, he added. If he acquired them after entering the Cabinet he would not have to declare them until he left, Worawit said.

“Assets subject to be declared to the NACC must ‘belong’ to the person. Theoretically, if [the assets] do not belong to the person, his spouse, or his minor children, they won’t need to be declared,” said Worawit.

The explanation on the legal requirements came after weeks of investigation into Prawit’s luxury watches.

The controversy sparked off in early December and continues to capture the public’s attention, as the number of watches seen on the general’s wrist over time grew from one to more than 20. The combined worth of the watches is believed to exceed Bt20 million.

Questions have arisen over how he obtained the expensive items given the income of a retired general and whether he had declared them to the NACC before his incumbency.

Prawit, joint junta leader and defence minister, has been asked to clarify the origin of the watches following the emergence of dozens of photos showing him wearing fancy watches on many occasions.

The secretary-general has refused to disclose any further detail regarding the ownership of the watches.

If the watches were a loan, some critics question whether Prawit had breached the law that prohibited government officials from receiving gifts worth more than Bt3,000.

Worawit said NACC officials would look at all the legal aspects of the case.

While there was some concern that the loan explanation would become a new stock argument for politicians concealing assets, Worawit said the agency would not necessarily regard this type of defence as valid.

Worawit also said yesterday that the NACC president, Pol General Watcharapol Prasanratchakit, had announced in a meeting on Tuesday that he would withdraw from the panel probing the case.

This was despite the fact that he was neither a stakeholder, nor did he have any reason to be disqualified under the charter, the secretary-general said.

Watcharapol has come under pressure since the scandal broke.

The NACC president in 2014 had worked in the coup-installed government, closely under Prawit. The public has demonstrated distrust in the scrutiny of the junta leader with Watcharapol at the helm.

A brief scuffle also broke out at a press briefing after a solo pro-democracy activist Ake Auttagorn showed up unexpectedly and gave a picture to Worawit.

The pictures showed Napoleon the pig from George Orwell’s political allegory “Animal Farm”. There was also an image of “three wise monkeys” wearing diamond rings and watches.

Ake was quickly removed from the press conference room.

In the novella “Animal Farm”, Napoleon is a leader in the movement to overthrow the human ruler of the farm. He promises to make all animals equal and says he will never be like the oppressive men. But, after a while in power, Napoleon adopts human mannerisms and becomes “more equal” than the other animals.

Prawit, meanwhile, kept quiet and was guarded by six military aides who kept him away from reporters.

Suthep Thaugsuban, then-secretary-general of the now-defunct Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC), and eight others who are politicians from the Democrat Party, all denied the nine charges.

The Criminal Court yesterday granted bail of Bt600,000 each for the nine defendants on the condition that they do not leave the country without court permission. The nine defendants earlier had offered a surety of Bt800,000 per person in applying for temporary release.

The court scheduled March 19 for their prosecution and for the defence to examine the lists of witnesses and evidence.

Suthep yesterday said all the nine PDRC leaders agreed to fight the court battle whatever the final court verdict would be.

“We believe in the Thai justice system,” he said, adding that they would not attempt to delay the trial, as had been alleged by some critics.

Suthep also said that the nine leaders should be the only defendants in the case, as they started “all the movement” while the other defendants simply played supporting roles.

In addition to the 69-year-old Suthep, the other defendants are Sathit Wongnongtaey, 57; Chumpol Julasai, 48; Buddhipong Punnakan, 50; Issara Somchai, 72; Witthaya Kaewparadai, 63; Thaworn Senneam, 71; Natthapol Thipasuwan, 52; and Ekkanat Promphan, 32.

Sedition, terrorism, belonging to a criminal organisation, unlawful gathering and obstructing an election were among the nine charges against them.

The PDRC held street protests at many locations in Bangkok for several months from November 2013 to May 2014 against the government of Yingluck Shinawatra. Many thousands of people took part in the protests. The political turmoil was used as an excuse for the military led by the then army chief Prayut Chan-o-cha to stage the coup.

A key PDRC member, Sakoltee Phattiyakul, yesterday posted in his Facebook that he had no regrets about what he and his group had done. “If the clock turned back, (I) would do it again,” |he said in the post with hashtag #fight tooth and nail.

During that period, Suthep and other PDRC leaders often led the protesters to the offices of different state agencies and asked their officials to join the rally. The PDRC held a large-scale Bangkok Shutdown campaign in early 2014 at seven key locations in the city, paralysing most of the capital.

The nine PDRC leaders are among the 58 people originally accused in the cases stemming from the anti-government protests between 2013 and 2014, Office of the Attorney-General (OAG) deputy spokesman Prayuth Phetkhun said yesterday. The accused people were leaders or key supporters of the demonstrations.

The Department of Special Investigation, during the Pheu Thai-led government, in May 2014, had requested the Attorney-General to bring the case to court. The public prosecutors later dropped the case against one of the accused, a lecturer at Thammasat University.

In May 2014, four of the accused – including academic Sombat Thamrongthanyawong and media celebrity Seree Wongmontha – were brought to court on the charge of sedition and other charges.

The remaining defendants have sought postponement of their appearance before court, the spokesman said yesterday.

Chartpong Jiraphan, deputy director-general of the Office of the Attorney-General’s Special Litigation Department, said yesterday that the agency would consider whether the defendants had provided justifiable reasons to seek postponement. If their reasons were found to be insufficient, they would be told to show up before court soon, he added.

An OAG working group on the case yesterday evening resolved that the 34 remaining defendants who failed to show up yesterday should report themselves to public prosecutors on March 14 regarding the charges against them, according to a source.

In a statement, the former ruling party warned that any further delay in the next election would significantly impact Thailand’s credibility in the eyes of the international community.

“We call on the relevant agencies to stop harming the country through legal cheating. And they have to speed up the return of power to the people, as stated in the road map,” Pheu Thai said in its statement released yesterday.

The party noted that Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha, who also heads the ruling junta, had clearly informed the world community that the election would take place in November this year.

Its move came after the committee vetting the MP election bill sought to stay the enforcement of the key legislation for 90 days after it is promulgated, instead of the following day after its enactment.

Pheu Thai said it suspected the vetting committee’s decision was politically motivated, with the hidden goal of allowing the people in power to extend their time in office.

It said the ruling junta National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) and its organs had used “legal tactics” on many occasions that aroused suspicion that they wanted to stay on in power. The statement pointed to the National Reform Council’s vote against the first constitutional draft as an example of such alleged tactics.

“The NCPO and its organs have tried every means – through their powers and the laws that they create, and also through orders issued by the NCPO head – to gain political advantages for themselves and the political groups that support the NCPO,” Pheu Thai said.

Pheu Thai noted that even after the organic law on political parties became effective, the junta has not lifted its ban on political activities. Instead, it issued a new order last month that was viewed as undermining the existing political parties while favouring new ones to be set up in support of the junta, the party said.

It said that with a postponement in the enactment of the election law, existing political parties would still be banned from holding activities such as convening meetings. However, it added that as a result, the junta and its organs such as the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) would stay longer in power.

Meanwhile, the law-vetting committee, which held its last meeting to amend the MP election bill yesterday, insisted on postponement of the enforcement of the MP selection bill to 90 days from its first promulgation. Those wanting to see it extended further to 120 days could propose that in a motion at the NLA meeting today, said Kittisak Rattanawaraha, a committee member.

The committee’s spokesperson, Taweesak Sootakawatin, insisted on the need to extend the period, given it was a part of political reform that facilitated primary voting, for which political parties needed time to prepare themselves.

He slammed the media as reporting with political bias and failing to see the need for political reform.

Taweesak said some NLA members had proposed the extension to be 120 days, as they feared 90 days would not be enough.

The NLA is set to deliberate on the committee’s amended bill in its second and third readings today.

Ake was the activist who in 2013 held up the banner saying “respect my vote”, protesting against Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva during the political upheaval that led to the coup.

The picture presented to NACC secretary-general Worawit Sukboon was of Napoleon the pig from George Orwell’s famous political allegory “Animal Farm”. There was also an image of “three wise monkeys” wearing diamond rings and watches.

At the time, Worawit was briefing the media on progress in the investigation on the origin of the luxury timepieces worn by Deputy Prime Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan.

Ake, who emerged out of nowhere and said he had a gift for the NACC official, was quickly removed from the press conference room.

In the novella “Animal Farm”, Napoleon is a leader in the movement to overthrow the human ruler of the farm. He promises to make all animals equal and says he will never be like the oppressive men. But, after a while in power, Napoleon adopts human mannerisms and becomes “more equal” than the other animals.

In a statement, the previously ruling party warned that any further delay in the next election would significantly impact Thailand’s credibility in the eyes of the international community.

“We call on the relevant agencies to stop harming the country through this legal cheating. And they have to speed up the return of power to the people, as stated in the road map,” Pheu Thai said in the statement released on Wednesday.

The party noted that Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha, who also heads the ruling junta, had clearly informed the world community that the election would take place in November this year.

Its move came after the committee vetting the MP election bill sought to stay the enforcement of the key legislation for 90 days after it is promulgated, instead of the day after its enactment.

Pheu Thai said that it suspected the vetting committee’s decision was politically motivated, with the hidden goal of allowing the people in power to extend their time in office.

It said the ruling junta, the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), and its organs had used “legal tactics” on many occasions that aroused suspicions that they wanted to stay on in power. The statement pointed to the National Reform Council’s vote against the first constitutional draft as an example of such alleged tactics.

“The NCPO and its organs have tried every means – through their powers and the laws that they create, and also through orders issued by the NCPO head – to gain political advantages for themselves and the political groups that support the NCPO,” Pheu Thai said.

Pheu Thai noted that even after the organic law on political parties became effective, the junta had not lifted its ban on political activities. Instead, the junta issued a new order last month that was viewed as undermining the existing political parties while favouring new ones to be set up in support of the junta, the party said.

It said that with a postponement in the election law’s enactment, existing political parties would still be banned from holding activities such as convening meetings. However, it added that, as a result, the junta and its organs such as the National Legislative Assembly would stay in power longer.