Pita slams Election Commission”s “double standards”

Poll rulers have the ability to “pick and select rules.”

Move Forward Party (MFP) chief adviserPita Limjaroenrathas accused the Election Commission (EC) of double standards for its petition to the Constitutional Court seeking to disband the party.

Mr. Pita highlighted the EC’s method of filing complaints against the MFP as being unlawful in an update on the MFP’s battle to prevent the same fate as its president, the Future Forward Party, suffered in 2020.

He claimed that the EC has a triple standard because it relied solely on Section 92 of the natural law for political events, which allows the EC to obtain the MFP’s abandon without conducting an investigation.

According to Mr. Pita, it is obvious that Section 93 of the law cannot be used without a network to Section 92. A double regular may happen, he said, if both sections are exercised differently in a group breakdown case.

The EC if petition the court to dissolve any group when trustworthy evidence is that any party has carried out acts that undermine the democratic king.

Section 93, however, says the group registration, when discovering like acts, may gather facts and evidence and provide it to the EC for thought, which did follow the rules and methods specified by the commission.

He added the EC was exercise merely Section 92 in a party dissolution case it wished to expand, but if it wants to slow down the process, it was exercising both sections continuously.

But, Mr. Pita said that the party would be on an “expressway” to breakdown if both sections were used individually in the MFP disintegration case.

Is it possible for the EC to use its judgment in this manner without the involvement of anyone else?

He also emphasized the necessity for a group facing breakdown to file a complaint with the EC.

This is also highlighted by the EC itself’s November, 2012, document, which states that a party may be allowed to recognize and defend the case with the EC before it is submitted to the jury.

The EC has previously responded to the MFP’s problems, denying the group is being treated unfairly.

The MFP was given a seven-day deadline on June 19 to organize data for a hearing on Wednesday.