Priyadarshi Slams Government Insincerity, Blocks Constitutional Amendments While Benefiting from 2017 Charter, Nurtures Blue Ticket System
A Pheu Thai MP criticized the government for blocking constitutional amendment bills despite February's public referendum supporting a new charter, accusing officials of insincerity while refusing to take responsibility for systemic failure
At 11:05 a.m. on May 15, 2025, during the first joint parliamentary session regarding an urgent matter concerning approval for consideration of bills not yet approved by parliament under Article 147, Paragraph 2 of the constitution, Priyadarshi Chumphol, a Pheu Thai party list MP, raised concerns about why the cabinet had not submitted the constitutional amendment bill to parliament despite the February 8 public referendum clearly showing majority support for drafting an entirely new constitution rather than merely patching the 2017 charter.
Since February 8, society has become increasingly aware of the 2017 charter's problems. Priyadarshi pointed to the Election Commission's delayed reporting, miscounted ballots, and barcode insertion errors in voting cards—problems the public cannot address. He noted the Auditor General's office marked the one-year anniversary of a building collapse with a music video rather than taking responsibility. He cited the previous parliament speaker dismissing complaints about leaked clips involving the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and the NACC's statement essentially whitewashing a former minister in a stock manipulation case. He also mentioned the Election Commission moving toward dismissing the prime minister and other members in a parliament vote-buying case.
"The country's problems are this severe, the people's voice is this clear, yet the government remains silent, denies responsibility, and claims the constitution is parliament's matter," Priyadarshi stated.
He explained that while legally the cabinet need not be directly involved in amending Article 256 to create mechanisms for drafting a new constitution, the cabinet has two options: either resubmit the two bills that passed initial readings for parliament's approval, or clearly declare opposition and state when it will submit its own constitutional draft. However, the cabinet has chosen neither path—it neither resubmits the original bills nor provides reasonable explanation for abandonment, nor does it show clarity about submitting a new draft, with no mention even in the policy statement.
"I've carefully listened to all government arguments this past week and honestly, none of them hold up," Priyadarshi said. "The prime minister says it's parliament's matter, but how can parliament's position be independent of the cabinet's when there are 300 government MPs plus senators influenced by the PM? When government representatives say the cabinet will move on this but ask for it to be at the end of their tenure, I ask: how do you know we're not already at the end? I'm not Nostradamus, but I know any government that exploits people's hardship while allowing the wealthy to profit from hoarding oil won't last long."
