On Wednesday, the Democratic Party said it would vote against the cannabis bill even though it was proposed by its coalition partner, arguing that the move ignores concerns about social issues.
The Bhumjaithai Party, which sponsors the bill, said an unprecedented negative vote could hurt the government coalition. However, its representatives made it clear that they would not be deterred by the Democrats’ threat, as they had a promise to keep.
According to Democrat MP Satit Wongnongtaey, his colleagues had decided to vote against the Cannabis and Hemp Bill because the House that considered it reportedly ignored modifications that Democrat and Pheu Thai MPs and Chulalongkorn University Medical School had proposed.
While it was first set to deliberate at the second reading on September 14, Democrat MPs from the Pheu Thai and Move Forward parties opposed the legislation’s passage. Both argued that it had been extensively altered during the scrutiny process after it was presented and submitted to the first reading.
Then, a 198-136 vote with 12 abstentions in the House determined that the bill should be withdrawn and submitted to a review by a scrutiny committee.
However, although the committee had already completed the review, none of the proposed modifications were considered, Mr. Satit added.
The MP said that the Democratic Party had proposed 12 changes while the Pheu Thai Party had proposed five. Moreover, Chulalongkorn University’s faculty of medicine suggested that the bill should be reviewed section by section.
Mr. Satit also commented that the scrutiny committee had only called two or three meetings after the bill was withdrawn from the House. Some members advised the committee to consider the changes but got no response, he added.
The Democratic Party asked the committee to reconsider whether cannabis was a narcotic to change the definition of “medical use in the households.” Its parliamentarians also proposed eliminating the requirement that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has to promote the development of cannabis strains, arguing that it could create a conflict of interest and contradict the agency’s responsibilities.
The lack of controls on the trade in cannabis smoking equipment has also raised concerns among Democrat MPs.
According to Mr. Satit, cannabis must be reinstated as a category 5 substance in the narcotics list since Narcotics Act’s Section 39 states that the move can only be carried out with an announcement from the Public Health Ministry.
Another Democrat MP, Phisit, claimed that cannabis liberalization could inadvertently lead children to become addicted.
In addition, it would have other effects in different areas, as Thailand would be listed as the land of cannabis and both travelers and goods exported from the country would be subject to extensive screening at immigration points.
However, Bhumjaithai party leader, Public Health Ministry Anutin Charnvirakul, insisted that the bill had not been drafted for recreational use and had clear penalties to prevent cannabis abuse.
