But he said he was not opposed to the talk if no law or post-coup order was violated.

“I don’t give them any permission. They can do anything they like, as long as it is not against the law,” he told reporters at Government House.

Rival groups of politicians plan to meet next week to discuss ways to reach reconciliation. They are expected to make proposals to the government.

The talk was reportedly initiated by veteran politician Sudarat Keyuraphan from Pheu Thai, the previous ruling party.

General Prayut said that as far as he knew, politicians wanted his government to expedite the amnesty process, as well as encourage political reconciliation.

He said law violators should fight their legal cases properly and not expect the law to be bent in their favour in exchange for peace to be restored.

“Don’t you sympathise with people who got shot and killed in bombings, as well as those being imprisoned?” the PM said, referring to ordinary protesters who suffered after taking part in street rallies over the past decade.

“You seem to have more concern for politicians and protest leaders,” he said.

It was unclear yesterday as to whether the politicians’ talk will go ahead, as a key Democrat Partypolitician expected to join the talk has requested a postponement.

‘Mistrust by those in power’

Democrat deputy leader Nipit Intarabombat said he had phoned Sudarat to tell her that he wanted the talk to be postponed following “mistrust by the people in power”.

He said the politicians involved had good intentions towards the country, adding that the people in power should not view moderate politicians like these with mistrust.

Somsak Prisanananthakul, a key Chart Thai Pattana Party politician, said the talk would involve three to four politicians, in order to avoid violating a post-coup order banning political gatherings of more than four people.

The veteran politician said despite Nipit’s pullout, he would definitely take part in the talk although no exact date had been set.

Somsak maintained that he did not think the politicians would bargain with the government for amnesty. “We just aim to help the country,” he said.

In a Facebook post, Sudarat blamed Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva for Nipit’s decision to pull out of the talk. Abhisit had said the talk would cause the ruling generals to mistrust politicians.

Abhisit did not respond to Sudarat’s remarks. However, Democrat politician Thana Chirawinit said that the Democrat leader supported a talk with no hidden agenda.

He said that at a time of military rule, the talk should have been done quietly, if the goal was really to find a way out for the country.

Thana said Sudarat was acting as if she initiated the talk – playing the role amid speculation she would become the next Pheu Thai leader. “I wonder if there is some hidden agenda,” the Democrat said.

On Monday the trio agreed that a meeting should be held for politicians to discuss ways of freeing the country of its political issues as politicians are part of the problem.

Nipit, however, said Friday that he had called Sudarat and told her he had to put off the meeting because “anxiety” about it had risen.

The former Phatthalung province representative said he would like to boost understanding among relevant parties first, especially the powers that be.

They should not be sceptical of politicians who are politically neutral, he said.

He said he would continue to spread his thoughts through the mass media.

He asked for people with non-extremist views to be given space to express themselves so the hardliners were not the only ones doing the talking.

That was needed so the country could move forward.

He said politicians should be engaged in “constructive talks” that focus on reconciliation, instead of creating more conflict.

“Old problems must be put aside so the country will be able to move forward. Don’t keep old problems while creating new ones. We don’t go anywhere. No reform is happening,” the prime minister said.

“Just going to vote in the referendum and the general election is so difficult,” he added.

Prayut said he had encouraged talks between politicians in conflict with each other but such talks should not result in pressuring the government or the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO).

He said there should not be preconditions exempting certain politicians from legal action, adding that they have to fight their legal cases.

“Don’t force me to include certain people in the talks. If they want talks, I will organise one. But it’s still not the time now,” he said.

When asked whether he would hold a forum for reconciliation, Prayut said he had considered the idea and the National Reform Steering Assembly is doing the job now.

The prime minister also shrugged off a recent meeting in Singapore between former commerce minister Watana Muangsook and former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

In a recent Facebook post, Watana showed photos of him with Thaksin and during a flight, with his white T-shirt displaying a message in red lettering saying he is against the draft constitution.

“That has no impact on me or the NCPO. I don’t worry,” Prayut said when asked to comment on the matter.

He said Watana benefited from the recent lifting of the NCPO’s order prohibiting politicians from travelling overseas.

Prayut added, however, that the NCPO and government legal authorities are determining whether politicians travelling overseas have “created further problems”.

Matichon weekend editor Suwapong Chanfangpet and cartoonist Arun Watcharasawat met with Somchai for an hour and explained that the cartoon that was published in the Matichon Weekender from September 4 to 10 last year referred to the former charter draft written by the now-defunct Constitution Drafting Committee led by Borwornsak Uwanno.

Somchai said Arun was not being held responsible but Matichon Weekender should not have republished the cartoon. Suwapong, however, defended himself by saying he did not intend to republish the cartoon. He said it was an honest error that led to the misunderstanding the cartoon referred to the current draft charter written by the Constitution Drafting Commission led by Meechai Ruchuphan.

“Since Suwapong has admitted to his mistake, we will not take legal action and the cartoon has been removed from the online version,” Somchai said.

In a related development, Somchai said the EC would not intensify prosecution of offenders after the Constitutional Court’s |ruling that Clause 2 of Article 61 of the Referendum Law was constitutional.

He also rejected a call from Jon Ungphakon, director of the Internet Dialogue on Law Reform (iLaw), who had asked the EC to review its ban on certain activities during the referendum.

Somchai said the EC believes its rules and regulations are appropriate and do not breach people’s rights or liberty.

“Only three groups of people will be affected by our rules – people who use false, vulgar or inciting statements,” he said.

“iLaw should accept the court ruling, otherwise it should remove the word law from its name,” he said.

Meanwhile, National Legislative Assembly (NLA) member General Somjet Boonthanom said the Constitutional Court had not summoned the NLA for clarification over Clause 2 of Article 61 because the law was already clear.

“The referendum law does not block anyone from expressing their opinion but they must not present statements that are distortions, false, vulgar or inciting,” he said.

Meanwhile, United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship co-leader Nattawut Saikua said his group’s television programme “Meechai charter: Thailand steps ahead or a long step back”, the first episode of which is scheduled to be broadcast today at 6.30pm, would not be cancelled.

He said he was confident the content of the programme was legal despite the Constitutional Court ruling and Clause 2 remaining in force.

Nattawut added that the Election Commission’s television programmes on the charter draft are clearly biased.

He said the first episode of his group’s programme would be titled “Look at Myanmar, England to get some ideas about referendum”, and presented by senior foreign affairs reporter Prawit Rojanaphruk, and guest speaker Pimsiri Petnamrob, an activist who specialises in Myanmar affairs.

Meanwhile, Suthep Thaugsuban, chairman of the Foundation of the Great Mass of the People for Reform of Thailand, is continuing his discussion about political reform in the charter draft viaFacebook Live.

Kamnoon Sidhisamarn, secretary of the NRSA’s whip, yesterday said the assembly had resolved to set up the committee to study and draft laws relating to national reform.

Pol Major Yongyuth Sarasombat will chair the committee, which will be tasked to analyse and provide recommendations for reform-related laws, Kamnoon said.

Reform-related laws should integrate plans for reform to achieve national goals, he added.

The laws are supposed to take effect within 120 days after a new constitution is adopted.

However, panellists at a public forum wanted some articles amended and urged the government to clearly outline torture protection measures and develop rehabilitation services for torture survivors.

Somchai Homlaor, a prominent human rights lawyer, said the bill was subjected to the principles of two UN conventions – the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which Thailand ratified in 2007, and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which the country signed in 2012 but has not ratified.

The government’s move was triggered by recommendations concerning torture and enforced disappearance that Thailand received from the UN’s Universal Periodic Review session in Geneva in May, he said.

Civic groups and private organisations were involved in the bill’s drafting, which was mainly overseen by Justice Ministry’s Rights and Liberties Protection Department.

Pokpong Srisanit, a law lecturer at Thammasat University, said the bill extends the definition of torture and forced disappearance victims.

Victims include not only those who are directly tortured but also their relatives, he said.

The bill empowers a committee, jointly run by the civil sector and the government, to get involved in investigations.

It also stipulates that torture and enforced disappearance cases will be heard by the Criminal Court, not military tribunals.

The bill is aimed at state authorities who commit an offence and importantly the offender’s superiors.

The crime, according to the bill, carries a maximum life in prison sentence and Bt1 million fine if it causes the victims’ death.

Section 17 of the bill bans detention in a “safe house” or hidden place, he added.

Sam Zarifi, director for Asia-Pacific at the International Commission of Jurists, pointed out that the bill combined laws against torture and enforced disappearance.

The government’s attempt to promulgate such a law earns the country the status of being the regional leader in human rights.

However, the bill should not set a 20-year statute of limitation, Zarifi said, adding that the bill fails to address practices to ensure that Thailand would not send torture survivors back to dangerous areas.

The problems for torture cases are the passive victims who are “small” people and do not want to take legal action against the offending officers, he said.

Angkhana Neelapaijit, a member of the National Human Rights Commission, suggested all parties should raise people’s awareness of enforced disappearance and torture crimes in a bid to turn the passive victims into active victims.

The bill is now pending for the National Legislative Assembly’s consideration and would take at least three months before approval, said Nongporn Roongpetchwongse, deputy director-general of the Rights and Liberties Protection Department.

David Engstorms, a social worker involved with the rehabilitation of violence survivals, also asked the government to develop rehabilitation and healing services for survivors, which Thailand has still failed to tackle.