Possible ethics investigation targets Pita
As they are currently the subject of a spacecraft into whether they adhered to the code of ethics over their position on the der- guess law, forty-four Members of the Move Forward Party ( MFP), including its deputy adviser Pita Limjaroenrat, may be subject to life in prison.
Theerayut Suwankesorn, a lawyer, petitioned the National Anti-Corruption Commission ( NACC ) on Friday, asking it to look into allegations of serious ethical violations made by the 44 lawmakers who submitted the bill to amend Section 112 of the Criminal Code.
Last month, Mr. Theerayut requested that the Constitutional Court stop the MFP’s attempts to alter the area.
A similar complaint was submitted with the NACC on Friday by Sonthiya Sawasdee, a past advisor to the House committee on legal matters.
The requests were submitted after the Constitutional Court ruled on Wednesday that the MFP intended to destroy the democratic king by continuing to try to change the Lese-majeste rules.
According to Mr. Theerayut, buyers of political business are required by law to uphold certain moral standards, including protecting the royal institution.
According to Section 235 of the law, the NACC must submit the situation to the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions if it finds evidence of a major social violation by holders of political company.
They will be suspended from work pending the court’s decision if it accepts the event.
They will be barred from attempting to run for office for MPs, senator, and people of local organizations if they are found innocent as alleged. Additionally, they will be barred from holding any political company for the rest of their lives. Additionally, the court has the authority to revoke their ballot privileges for a maximum of ten years.
According to Mr. Sonthiya, the Constitutional Court’s decision is legally binding on all organizations, and he anticipates that the 44 MFP legislators will be subject to a lifelong social restrictions.
One of the 44 Members who signed the bill to amend Section 112 was assistant MFP head Sirikanya Tansakul, who asserted that the group has no plans to withdraw Section 112.
She stated that” MPs who carry out their parliamentary duties have the authority and right to alter rules.”
She responded,” We still have hope,” when asked if the 44 Members ‘ political professions would survive the event. However, we must also be ready for the worst-case scenario.
Ms. Sirikanya said the court proceedings does take some time, and the group will have enough time to prepare young people to get over the working of party matters if the Supreme Court laws against them and revokes their political privileges.
The group’s ideas may continue even if the 44 Members are barred from politics, she declared.
The group has removed its legislation regarding amending Section 112 from its official website since the judge’s decision on Wednesday against the MFP.
Chaithawat Tulathon, the head of the MFP, claimed on Friday that it was overturned because the court saw it as an attempt to topple the king. Legitimate counsel for the party recommended that it be revoked, according to Mr. Chaithawat.
Additionally, Mr. Chaithawat stated that the investigation into the 44 MPs ‘ social behavior is separate from the possibility of the party being dissolved.
Before deciding on the group’s future course of action, the legal staff will review the entire text of the decision, he said.
Social activist Ruangkrai Leekitwattana petitioned the Election Commission on Thursday, requesting that it follow a dissolution case against the major opposition party.
According to Mr. Ruangkrai, he based his plea on political parties and Section 92 of the natural law.
According to this, the EC has appeal the Constitutional Court to consider dissolving a political group and forbidding its executives from voting for ten years if it has proof that they have attempted to overthrow the constitutional king.
The decision on Wednesday supported the assertion that Move Forward was attempting to abolish the constitutional monarchy by changing the lese-majeste rules.