Bangkok: The committee tasked with reviewing the cancellation of MOU 43-44 is contemplating a 30-day extension due to insufficient time for thorough consideration. Mr. Saritphong highlighted the ongoing differences in opinion within the committee and endorsed the government's initiative to organize a debate forum to inform the public. He stressed that the decision to cancel the MOU rests with the Cabinet and urged the public to prioritize national interests.
According to Thai News Agency, Mr. Srisutphong Kiewkhong, MP for Krabi and a member of the Bhumjaithai Party, who chairs the special committee reviewing the 2000 and 2001 Memorandum of Understanding between Thailand and Cambodia, provided an update on the study's progress. He stated that the study is currently in the report stage with a deadline of December 3rd. However, he expressed concern over the lack of time and has requested a 30-day extension to allow for comprehensive documentation from all parties involved. Mr. Nikorn Chamnong, Director of the Chartthaipattana Party, leads a working group focused on gathering evidence and examining information.
In light of the renewed border conflict, Mr. Srisutphong acknowledged that the committee is evaluating the situation. He reiterated that the authority to revoke the MOU lies with the government, while the committee's role is to provide recommendations. The decision to heed these recommendations ultimately resides with the Cabinet.
The meeting has uncovered differing opinions among civil servants, former civil servants, and the public, reflecting diverse belief systems and interpretations. Mr. Srisutphong clarified that opinions regarding the cancellation's impact vary, with some asserting that it could lead to a loss of rights, while others view it as an opportunity for Thailand to act on alleged violations of the convention. The interpretation of boundary lines remains a significant issue, necessitating further discussion on the Thai-Cambodian border conflict.
Regarding public participation in the upcoming government debate on MOU 43-44, Mr. Srisutphong supported including voices from the seven border provinces. He advocated for involving experts to provide balanced information to all parties.
He addressed concerns about potential disadvantages against Cambodia in the debate, emphasizing that the legal framework determines advantages and disadvantages. He underscored the importance of public knowledge and democratic engagement, noting that empirical evidence is crucial for assessing Cambodia's actions. By collecting data on violations, Thailand can benefit from informed analysis.
Mr. Srisutphong concluded by urging the public to prioritize national interests and avoid using differences of opinion for personal or political gain. He cautioned against allowing Cambodia to leverage issues on the international stage that may appear beneficial.