Published on November 6, 2023, at 18:31
Ruangkrai Leekitwattana, a political advocate, requested on Monday that the Election Commission look into two government officials he claims violated the constitution by owning stock in businesses through their wives.
If proven, it might result in them losing their seats in the cupboard.
Because their spouses own sizable amounts of shares in limited partnerships, Mr. Ruangkrai claims that Chaiya Promma, deputy minister of agriculture and cooperative & nbsp and Defence Minister Sutin Klungsang violated the charter’s Sections 170 and 187.
According to the two sections, politicians and their spouses are not permitted to own stock in a business while serving in the cabinet.
On September 1, Mr. Chaiya was given his new job, he claimed.
The Department of Business Development( DBD) was informed on September 16 by his partner, Anchalee Promma, a important primary in Sri Boonrueng Wattana Limited Partnership, that the agreement had received 300,000 baht in cash boost payments from Athisthan Powerhouse, according to Mr. Ruangkrai.
The child of Mr. Chaiya is Ms. Athisthan.
According to him, Ms. Anchalee’s involvement in the limited partnership may serve as evidence that she was still a companion and director there. Therefore, if found guilty by the Constitutional Court, Mr. Chaiya could be removed from the cabinet in accordance with Sections 170 ( 5 ) and 187 of the constitution, according to him. ( continues below )
Chaiya Promma, deputy minister of agriculture and cooperative
He claimed that Mr. Sutin was appointed defense secretary on September 1 and that as of November 3, his wife Chaweewan Klungsang was still listed in the DBD databases as the managing partner and a key member of the Klungang Esan collaboration. & nbsp,
Shares of the limited partnership were estimated to be worth 1.2 million baht, and as of November 3, Ms. Chaweewan held shares of that overall for 1 million, he said.
As a result, he claimed that the shares owned by Mr. Sutin’s partner may be considered to be the ministers’ shareholdings and nbsp in the same relationship.
He added that it was believed that Ms. Chaweewan held more than 5 % of the stock, which is against the law.
According to Mr. Ruangkrai, he had thus petitioned the EC to look into these two scenarios and send them to the Constitutional Court for review.