The court would also be empowered to impose temporary measures to prevent severe and irreparable damages and any foreseen fast-approaching violence.

The legislation was approved by the Assembly with 188 votes to none, with five abstentions, after hours of an intense debate.

One of the most contentious points was the provision, revised by an NLA vetting committee, to empower the Constitutional Court to issue temporary measures before it made a decision on coming cases to prevent irreversible damages or violence.

Banjerd Sinkaneti, a member of the NLA vetting committee and also a law professor, argued that the imposition of temporary measures were widely used in other countries with a Constitutional Court, including Germany and Austria. To do otherwise risks winning the case but losing in reality because a loss had already been inflicted or incurred, Banjer said.

However, a minority of the committee and NLA members argued that the court should be non-partisan.

The issue was finally resolved by granting the court the power to issue temporary measures without scrutiny by the Lower House.

Another point over which the legislators extensively argued involved the terms of Constitutional Court judges.

While the CDC had laid out a fundamental principle that those failing to meet the new qualifications set in the new charter should be required to leave office, the NLA vetting committee had revised the draft and allowed the judges to stay on regardless of their qualifications.

There are now nine Constitutional Court judges, four of whom have unexpired terms, while the terms have expired for the other five. There would be a new selection to replace the five judges, but the NLA voted to allow them to stay until the House convenes.

Former judge Supoj Kaimook argued that it would not be graceful to allow the judges whose terms had already expired to remain in office for too long.

However, other legislators reasoned that the delay in replacing them would allow the participation of the president of the Lower House as well as the head of the opposition in the selection process.

The draft would be submitted to the Constitutional Court and the CDC for further review.

A joint committee could be set up in the event that one of the agencies disagreed with the NLAs draft.

The junta should refrain from human rights violations and rescind orders that affected them to set an example, said Chayika Wongsapachan, Pheu Thai foreign affairs working group member.

The government has continued to exercise its absolute power even though the new Constitution had already come into effect, she said. She pointed to the mistrust among government officials as well as the general public. It is a serious violation of human rights, Chayika said.

The Pheu Thai official urged the junta to revoke any existing orders and stop arbitrary detention for so-called “attitude adjustment” as well as stop trying civilians in the military court.

Next, the government should stop abusing any laws or measures in a discriminatory manner, she said, citing it could lead to conflict in society. It should hasten to realise reforms in the justice system, Chayika added.

Thirdly, the junta should allow freedom of expression and public participation in finding solutions to the problems facing the country, she said.

Lastly, it should return power to the people and respect their rights as well as stop the ongoing political purge so to lead the country towards democracy and make the national agenda of human rights acceptable to all parties, Chayika said.

THE JUNTA’S latest move to empower the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc), giving it more authority at the provincial and regional levels over other officials, could be a preparation for the coming election and a return to civilian rule, political observers said yesterday.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, as the chief of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) on Wednesday exercised his absolute power using Article 44 to amend the security law governing Isoc.

The amendment cites that various non-military officials from different agencies, including the Justice and the Interior spheres, were included in the structure with the head of Isoc at the national, regional and provincial level as the de facto chief commander in their responsible areas.

The move was among several other changes, including the upcoming Cabinet reshuffle, amid growing pressure on the regime to be clear about holding an election and restoring democratic rule.

Surachart Bamrungsuk, a prominent security scholar at Chulalongkorn University, said yesterday that the additional authority given to Isoc could be utilised in the political battle against civilian politicians.

Normally, the military role is expanded during wartime, causing overlapping work with civilian government officials, he explained.

But the current move is not related to wars. So, it can be viewed that the Army is seeking power to have control over politics, Surachat said.

“It would group together relevant agencies – military, police, prosecutors and the chief of mitigation agencies – to handle security matters effectively,” he said.

The regime has initiated a 20-year national strategy and its power to select the future Senate should be taken into consideration alongside this Isoc power in order to understand the big picture, he said.

Since the 2006 and 2014 coups, Isoc had been utilised extensively to serve the Army’s political purpose such as highlighting the military roles in politics. The next government could face more challenges because of Isoc, in addition to those posed by the new charter, he added.

Government Spokesman Sansern Kaewkamnerd said yesterday that the amendment aimed to empower state mechanisms to effectively deal with all kinds of security threats, notably natural disasters, rather than controlling the population for political purposes as widely understood.

No change to existing structure

The premier made it clear that the amendments did not make any changes to the existing structure of Isoc, but had only added disaster relief and mitigation work, Sansern said.

Surachart argued that citing internal security including natural disaster as the need to restructure Isoc was merely a “veil”.

The government already had sufficient tools to deal with the issue. For instance, it could work through the National Security Council, he said. Instead, they went to Isoc to deal with all security issues because Isoc was basically the Army, Surachart explained.

Another security academic Wanwichit Boonprong said it was possible to view the move as politically motivated. When the military retains its role after the election, Isoc with its new authority could be their sidekick working in provinces and rural areas, he said.

However, Wanwichit was not certain whether Isoc could be a political tool to help the junta gain advantage over other parties in the election though the agency was rather close to the people in local areas and its intelligence had proved efficient in testing the political temperature. If that was the case, the military could expect a backlash from civil society, he added.

On an optimistic note, Wanwichit said that it was also possible to see that |adjustment was to meet the new circumstance. Isoc did have a role in easing the people’s suffering in times of national disaster such as floods, he said. Giving it direct authority could make the work easier and reduce unnecessary redundancy, he added.

More than half the responses came from the Northeast, followed by Bangkok, the North, and the South with 25,000, 16,000, and 11,000 respectively.

Nakhon Ratchasima province brought the most responses with some 18,000 offering their opinion, followed by Bangkok.

Some deputy PMs, including General Prawit Wongsuwan who is in charge of security, also sit on the NCPO, but Prayut said the reshuffle had nothing to do with the work of the NCPO.

The economic team, he also said, will not be changed.

On Wednesday, Prayut confirmed the new Cabinet list had been forwarded for royal endorsement.

There has been speculation that the PM could reshuffle the economic team in a bid to shore up popularity ahead of the election.

To make the announcement meaningful, the coup-installed regime should at least allow freedom of expression, which has been widely suppressed since the junta came to power, the activists said.

The comments came after the government on Tuesday announced after its weekly Cabinet meeting that the human rights issue would be added to the national agenda, from next year to 2019. All government agencies would be instructed to carry out policies to improve the deteriorating human rights situation in the country, said Government Spokesman Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd.

The move, however, was seen by many people as well as netizens, as a joke. Some of them pointed to the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) and its government as part of the problem.

Sunai Phasuk, a veteran human rights advocate, mocked the announcement, saying it was bogus as the junta has made human rights violations a daily reality. “It is very ironic to announce human rights would be on the national agenda when simultaneously the regime is threatening to sue critics and put them in jail citing computer crimes,” the senior researcher at Human Rights Watch said.

It was on top of several other violations of human rights by the regime such as arbitrary detention and the restriction on press freedom, Sunai said.

He said if the regime was really serious about human rights, it should have lifted repressive orders issued under the powers of Article 44, he said. That way, it would have seemed much more sincere and meaningful, he added.

Another rights advocate, Chamnan Chanruang, stressed that the matter had been raised by the Justice Ministry as a master plan for a grand scheme. The junta government recently coined a buzzword ‘Thailand 4.0’, making it seem related to itself, he explained.

So, on the surface it may look good but the regime’s behaviour should be taken into consideration as well, the former chairman of the Amnesty International Thailand said. His impression was that the regime’s actions had not been in line with human rights, he added.

Thailand’s rights situation had recently been scrutinised by the United Nations Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and it was found that the government had yet to fulfil its obligations, he pointed out. Restrictions on free speech and on political gatherings, on top of other violations, have remained unchanged, he said.

These restrictions make the announcement concerning human rights in the national agenda meaningless unless the NCPO actually repeals its oppressive orders and frees all political prisoners, Chamnan said.

Nirun Phitakwatchara, a former member of the National Human Rights Commission, said that after making such an announcement, the government should strive to improve the democratic atmosphere in the country, too.

For starters, it could review the orders that may have affected people’s rights such as those involving freedom of expression, academic freedom, and right to political gatherings, he said.

Such freedom could help, given an election was taking shape, Nirun said. Unless people could exercise their rights and freedom, the election would not be considered free and fair and the elected government may not be very well accepted either, he added.

On Friday, the prime minister said he had finalised the fourth Cabinet reshuffle of his government and that the list was in the process of seeking royal endorsement. The matter was expected to be settled by next month, he had said.

On Tuesday, he was quoted as saying at the Cabinet meeting that the ministerial reshuffle was “nothing personal”, but all about work efficiency.

Government Spokesperson Lt-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd quoted Prayut as saying that the reshuffle was to enable utmost efficiency of his Cabinet’s performance. The PM urged those losing out in the reshuffle not to feel any hurt. If that were the case, he said, he would feel it the most since he was the one who had to make the decisions on who should leave and who should stay, the spokesman added.

His ministers so far have no idea about the new list. Deputy prime minister Wissanu Krea-ngam said on Monday that he was not aware to what extent Prayut had reshuffled the Cabinet, adding that he wasn’t even aware if he would be in the new line-up.

Another deputy prime minister, General Prawit Wongsuwan, said yesterday that his decision to continue working in the Cabinet would be dependent on his health.

Prayut said last Friday that his senior military senior classmates such as Prawit and Interior Minister General Anupong Paochinda, as well as his close friend Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister General Chatchai Sarikulya, would remain in the Cabinet. He also said that the number of military officers exiting the Cabinet would be more than those being inducted.

A source said former Interior permanent secretary Krisda Boonrat would take the top post at the Agriculture Ministry, while former reformer Wiwat Salyakamthorn would be his deputy minister. Wiwat has long been known in his educational work for his adoption of HM the late King Bhumibol Adulyadej’s Self Sufficiency Theory. Chatchai, meanwhile, would be compensated with the deputy prime minister post, the source said

The trials in absentia have been sought by the Office of Attorney-General.

Meanwhile, lawyers representing Thaksin argued that the new law on trials in absentia, which took effect recently, could not be applied to these cases retroactively.

Suriyan Hongwilai, the court’s spokesman, said some of the judges who originally handled the cases against Thaksin may have retired, so it will take some time for the Supreme Court to convene senior judges to fill those vacant slots.

Public prosecutors have asked the high court to consider trials in absentia under the new criminal law against corruption committed by political office holders.

Thaksin was accused of abusing his power while in office for the conversion of a mobile phone concession fee into an excise tax to benefit his family’s company, and for the state-owned Krung Thai Bank’s approval of a fraudulent multi-billion-baht loan to the Krisada Mahanakorn Group.

Since Thaksin fled the country several years ago, the high court had suspended these and other cases involving the ex-premier because the law previously did not allow trials without the presence of the accused. Suriyan said the court would still seek the presence of Thaksin for these cases while also considering trials in absentia as requested by prosecutors.

However, Chusak Sirinil, chief of the Pheu Thai party, said it is against general principles to retroactively apply amendments to the criminal law when this will negatively affect a defendant. He argued that the high court had already suspended the cases, so the amendments should not be applicable in these cases.

Pichit Chuenban, a former lawyer for Thaksin, shared the same opinion, saying that old cases against the ex-premier are not applicable under the amendments to the criminal law for trials in absentia.

The order has been published in the Royal Gazette today.

The Internal Security Command Office (Isoc) will be tasked with helping to assess the threats and report to the Cabinet. It will also develop operational plans for the Cabinet to endorse.

New internal security committees would be set up to take charge of implementing these plans at all levels – national, regional and provincial.

Prayut said his reason for invoking the order was that threats had become complex and Isoc needed to be strengthened so it could keep up with changes to ensure national security and public safety.

Isoc can also draw or transfer personnel from other government agencies to help with its work.

Prof Prinya said every charter guarantees the rights of defendants until their case is final. For that reason, defendants – especially the poor – should be free until the verdict is delivered.

At present, the freedom of defendants is guaranteed by bail placement, but many poor people don’t have the money to post bail and as such are jailed while their cases proceed.

As many as 66,000 people are in jail because they cannot post bail, Prof Prinya noted.

Prof Prinya said the bail system could increase injustice. Also, the posting of bail does not guarantee that those defendants would stay in the country to fight their cases.

Campaigners propose that a proper assessment of a defendant’s flight risk be carried out instead of the current system.

Pol Lt-General Amnuay Nim-mano, of the reform committee, said the proposal was in line with the committee’s direction on the issue of bail lodgement.