A total of 101 NLA members voted for the bill, while 20 voted against it and two abstained.

A 24-member committee was set up to complete vetting of the draft law within seven days.

The assembly was deeply split before the vote yesterday as more than a dozen of its members took turns to try to convince others to either support or oppose the controversial Bill, but opponents were outvoted by the end of the day.

Supporters, mostly from military and business backgrounds, claimed that such a law was long overdue and would enhance security and the economy.

Opponents, mainly from academia and civil society, said it violated as many as 10 articles in the constitution, was tantamount to signing a blank cheque for those in power to possibly abuse, and was likely to cause more - not less - harm to national security.

"Our country has come too far to turn left or right to return to autocracy so that a particular group of people can capitalise on it," NLA member Prasong Soonsiri told the assembly. "To approve it, is to sign a blank cheque and let them fill in the figures as much as they like. This draft bill is inappropriate and not right.

"We shouldn't we accept its principle," said Prasong, who detailed how many rights under the constitution ranging from freedom of expression, freedom of mobility, right to safety and life could be suspended with no recourse under the bill.

Gen Chokechai Hongthong, another NLA member begged to differ. He compared internal security to much needed oxygen. "You will only regret it when the oxygen runs out," he warned.

"This bill is a light medicine that everyone can take," he said, comparing it to martial law or the emergency decree still in effect in many provinces.

"The military needs no power. We have enough power. But we want to pursue our noble mission."

Oxygen or not, NLA member Gothom Arya was not pleased and warned the bill would normalise extra-constitutional power on a permanent basis.

"This is the danger. Some kind of fears are irrational. It's paranoia that's been accumulated from the past and Thailand had witnessed some gross abuses of power before," said Gothom, who warned that if the bill was passed, it would cause greater mistrust between citizens and the state - and disunity.

He asked how Thailand could explain such a draconian law to the world community.

"Human rights is also like oxygen that is needed because you never know when you will end up on the receiving end of abuse."

Other supporters kept endorsing the bill with arguments ranging from "bad people need no rights but must be dealt with by force" and that the Bill was "necessary".

But NLA member and Thammasat University rector Suraphol Nitikraipoj said any law should reflect the system of administration of a particular country and Thailand was supposed to be a democracy.

He said power granted under the law to the director of the Internal Security Operation Command (Isoc) - the prime minister - would be very vague, all encompassing and prone to abuse.

Under the draft bill, the military assigned by Isoc would be able to arrest anyone without a court warrant and act as an interrogator. And officers acting under the law would be immune from judicial review, he said.

Somkiate Onwimon, NLA member and TV producer, said the fact the law enabled Isoc to ban certain media reports for internal security reasons was tantamount to ending his media career.

NLA member Banyat Tassaneeyavej delivered a short and succinct judgement on the bill but failed to convince the majority of the assembly.

"The law reflects the insincerity of this government that it has no intention to return power to the people. So I'm against it and cannot accept it in principle," Banyat said.

Outsiders like Chiang Mai University's dean of law Somchai Preechasilpakul, told The Nation the new law was a new attempt to establish an autocracy in Thailand.

"It recognises autocracy as lawful," he said, adding that it was likely to take years for the public to realise the problem and to abolish it.

"Society will have to be aware about its problems first."