Bhumjaithai MPs Dispute Legal Panel Vote to Summon Speaker
Bhumjaithai Party MPs are divided over the Legal Affairs Committee's 8-0 vote to summon House Speaker Sopon Sarum for explanation. MP Nathathorn Srikogiao denies agreeing to the vote and will seek reconsideration, while MP Supachai Jaisamut accuses the committee chair of overreach and demands an apology to the Speaker, calling the move politically motivated and lacking precedent.
On November 4 at Parliament, MP Nathathorn Srikogiao of the Bhumjaithai Party, serving as a committee member and advisor to the Legal Affairs, Justice and Human Rights Committee, clarified his position after the committee voted 8-0 to reject the operating guidelines of the 35-member committee and prepare to summon House Speaker Sopon Sarum to explain. Nathathorn stated that within the Legal Affairs Committee there are disagreements, particularly among Bhumjaithai members, regarding meeting scheduling and the use of authority to summon agencies without committee approval. These issues have been debated at every meeting.
Today (Nov 4), the committee chair brought the Speaker's four proposed operating guidelines for the 35-member committee to a vote. More than 10 committee members attended, gave opinions, and some left before voting. Nathathorn clarified that despite reports of an 8-0 vote to summon Speaker Sopon and reject the 35-member committee's four guidelines, his name appeared in that vote. He insists he informed the Legal Affairs Committee chair that he disagreed with the approach. Tomorrow (Nov 5), the Legal Affairs Committee will meet again, and he will submit a motion as the first agenda item to request reconsideration of today's vote.
Meanwhile, MP Supachai Jaisamut, also Bhumjaithai and a Legal Affairs Committee member, said today's vote by opposition-aligned committee members — except Nathathorn, who misunderstood and is withdrawing his vote — was not covert but showed bad faith in using authority to force a vote. Supachai believes the committee chair should not have put this to a vote, as there is no basis or precedent. When the National Security Committee chair previously invited former Speaker Chuan Leekpai to explain, it wasn't proper though Chuan attended as a courtesy. But summoning Speaker Sopon now for the committee to question his reasons is inappropriate for Parliament. The Speaker is one of the three pillars of state sovereignty.
Supachai emphasized the Speaker's actions are not illegal; the committee simply disagrees with him, which amounts to rejecting regulations and the Constitution. The Speaker has done nothing wrong and has no obligation to explain to the committee. "I think the Legal Affairs Committee chair must come out and apologize to the House Speaker. This is an issue we must pursue. The chair has overstepped significantly," Supachai said.
Asked whether the 8-0 vote is invalid, meaning the Speaker cannot be summoned, Supachai said tomorrow he will propose a new motion and interpret it legally. Legal issues are one part, but impropriety is another, and he believes parliamentary tradition must be upheld.
