Bangkok: Mr. Nikorn Chamnong has reiterated that the Referendum Act should not be classified as a financial law, expressing concerns over the timing of protests and potential constitutional breaches if committee chairpersons collaborate with the House Speaker in decision-making. As a member of the joint committee reviewing the draft referendum bill, Mr. Nikorn emphasized the importance of timely action, warning against delays that could lead to constitutional issues. According to Thai News Agency, Mr. Nikorn addressed the ongoing debate over whether the referendum bill qualifies as a financial bill. He explained that the draft had undergone thorough scrutiny and was not identified as a financial bill by the House Speaker upon submission. He detailed the procedure outlined in the House meeting regulations, which requires the Speaker to flag any financial bill status and involve committee chairs for consensus if doubts arise. He highlighted that this step had already been completed without objections, and the bill was approved in its third reading, eliminating any remaining uncertainties. Mr. Nikorn elaborated that the law's drafting process acknowledged the substantial costs involved, estimated at over 3 billion baht. He clarified that adjustments to the referendum criteria did not transform the bill into a financial one. The parliamentary process concluded with the bill being classified as non-financial, despite initial deliberations in 2021. Further discussing the Senate's involvement, Mr. Nikorn noted that the House Speaker confirmed the bill's status to the Senate President, who also found no grounds for financial classification. He argued that revisiting the decision with committee chairs might contravene constitutional provisions and that any objections at this stage would be untimely. Expressing urgency, Mr. Nikorn urged the swift implementation of the referendum bill to avoid unnecessary delays. He cautioned that any deviation from the established process could result in a year-long postponement, disru pting the expected timeline for the first referendum, now anticipated for early 2026. Despite his personal discontent with the potential delay, Mr. Nikorn acknowledged the legal risks of circumventing the established procedures. When questioned about future prospects, Mr. Nikorn expressed optimism that the initial referendum would proceed smoothly, utilizing a straightforward MP format. He projected the referendum to occur by early 2026, factoring in the 180-day hold and additional procedural requirements. He concluded by emphasizing the inevitability of the timeline due to the cumulative duration of the legislative and endorsement processes.
Menu