House Committee Chair Summons Speaker Over Authority-Usurping Letter
House Legal Affairs Committee chair Rangsiman Rome has summoned House Speaker Soraphon Sarom to explain a letter bearing his signature that the committee says usurps its authority. Rangsiman insists the Speaker cannot deny involvement because his signature appears on the document, and warns that such moves undermine the parliamentary oversight system. The dispute stems from a broader conflict over committee regulations and the Bhumjaithai Party's withdrawal of a draft amendment.
At 9:30 a.m. on November 11 at Parliament, Rangsiman Rome, party-list MP for the People's Party and chair of the House Committee on Legal Affairs, Justice and Human Rights, gave an interview regarding the Bhumjaithai Party's withdrawal of a draft amendment to the House of Representatives meeting regulations concerning committee operations, and its revision to align with the People's Party. Asked whether he would accept the Bhumjaithai draft if put to a vote, Rangsiman said he had not yet seen the new Bhumjaithai draft, only the original draft by Nikorn Jamnong, party-list MP for Bhumjaithai. He believed the regulations had problems in several areas, though most did not concern his committee. The only part relevant to the committee was the lack of provisions regarding sub-committee meeting regulations. Most of it was not problematic, but some people were trying to create problems. He affirmed he was not in the opposition camp, as past practice had been followed.
"But if they still insist on usurping the opposition's authority, usurping the committee's authority, doing this destroys the entire oversight system, which should not happen. The Prime Minister has a duty to explain, so let him explain. Under the Emergency Decree, Article 13 only requires explaining in Parliament, not any criminal ethical violation. But if you don't comply, you'll have problems," Rangsiman said.
Asked about reflections that the committee's summoning of various Bhumjaithai figures had affected other committees, Rangsiman said there was an attempt to destroy the oversight system. Regarding the Legal Affairs Committee, it was just a pretext. If they claim the summoning power cannot be used without a vote, then don't come debate the committee's legitimacy and don't call it entrapment.
"Just because we do our job and hit the target, the government worries about oversight and refuses to let us oversee more. I confirm it's not about procedural issues. I've been committee chair twice now. I confirm we know exactly which points are risky and which can proceed. Our operating procedures have not deviated from the past at all, including the regulations which remain the same," Rangsiman said.
Asked whether the committee had received a response from House Speaker Soraphon Sarom confirming attendance at the November 12 meeting to explain the committee's operating procedures, Rangsiman said he would check with the committee secretariat but that all procedures had been completed. He hoped Soraphon would set an example for outsiders who would also need to explain to the committee.
Asked whether the Speaker could assign a Deputy Speaker or the Secretary-General to explain instead, Rangsiman said the committee invited everyone who signed the letter on the committee's operating procedures. That letter did not come to the committee through proper channels but was passed through another person who sent it to him. The committee would investigate the facts of what occurred.
What happened was the performance of duties without proper authority. Under the civil service system, anyone who signed that document would be summoned to explain. Soraphon claiming no involvement is impossible because his signature is on it.
