การกำหนดใหผนำฝายคานในสภาผแทนราษฎรมาจากพรรคการเมองทมไดมสมาชกดำรงตำแหนงประธานสภาผแทนราษฎร หรอรองประธานสภาผแทนราษฎร
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This independent study on the designation of the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives shall be from a political party whose member do not hold the position of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives. The study explores the historical development of the position of the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives in Thailand and provides a comparative analysis with the equivalent positions in England, Australia, and Canada. The study found out that, in Thailand, this requirement has existed since B.E. 2517 (1974), as introduced in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, based on the model of England. However, Section 106, paragraph one, of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2560 (2017) prescribes the qualifications and conditions for holding the position of the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives in a manner that differs from previous constitutions. It introduces an additional clause stating that “the Speaker of the House of Representatives or the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives”. This condition effectively disqualifies any political party with a member serving as the Speaker or the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives from having its member appointed as the Leader of the Opposition. The current provision is unaligned with the theoretical rationale for establishing of the position of the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives and international practices in countries. It also reflects a political culture that is incompatible with democratic governance. Therefore, the author proposes an amendment to Section 106, paragraph one, of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2560 (2017), and recommends enhancing the role of the parliamentary minority in legislative affairs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.013 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".