PUBLISHED: 17 May 2024 at 16: 27
After the latter was appointed as a secretary in the most recent cabinet reshuffle, forty lawmakers have requested that the Constitutional Court make a decision regarding the status of PM Pichit Chuenban and Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin.
According to Section 170( 4 ) and ( 5 ) of the charter, which deal with moral and ethical standards of a cabinet minister, the senators asked the court to decide whether the ministerial status of Mr. Srettha and Mr. Pichit should be terminated in response to the petition submitted to the court via Senate Speaker Pornpetch Wichitcholchai.
When Mr. Pichit dropped a package of meals containing$ 2 million ringgit at the Supreme Court in what was regarded as an attempted reward, he was sentenced to a six-month prison term in 2008, along with his two coworkers, for contempt of court.
In the notorious Ratchadaphisek property purchase situation, Mr. Pichit therefore represented former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his ex-wife, Khunying Potjaman na Pombejra. That time, Thaksin was given a two-year prison sentence.
Direkrit Jenkhrongtham, one of the lawmakers who signed the petition, said it is the Senate’s responsibility to seek a court decision on the discussion surrounding Mr Pichit’s requirements.
He claimed that Mr. Srettha should be held responsible for his choice to appoint a minister with a dubious history because Mr. Pichit’s do is frequently seen as an attempted bribe that renders him ineligible for a cabinet position.
Pichit Chuenban, the prime minister, arrives at Government House on May 7. ( Photo: Chanat Katanyu )
The Office of the Court, in the senator’s opinion, received the complaint and would likely decide on the reputation of the pair if the court takes it into consideration.
Earlier this month, Mr Srettha insisted he had submitted the new government line- up to the Council of State, the president’s legal shoulder, for evaluation before he really submitted it for royal support.
A source inside the case even claimed at the time that Mr. Pichit’s prison in the case involving the contempt of court in 2008 did not prevent him from being elected cabinet minister. Between the completion of a prison expression and the appointment, the faith had long passed the 10-year mark.
However, the issue of whether Mr. Pichit upholds the charter’s requirements for moral and ethical conduct is a different issue, according to the cause.