Politicians under fire over S112 force
PUBLISHED: 9 Aug 2024 at 06: 15
The National Anti-Corruption Commission ( NACC ) announced on Thursday that an investigation is looking into the ethical behavior of 44 Move Forward Party ( MFP ) politicians who supported a bill that sought to amend the lese majeste law.
The committee, according to NACC secretary-general Niwatchai Kasemmongkol, has determined there is a justification for the bill’s passage and has ordered an investigation into the 44 MFP MPs who backed it.
Theerayut Suwankesorn, a solicitor, petitioned the Constitutional Court in February to forbid the MFP from all promotion activities involving Section 112 of the Criminal Code.
The Constitutional Court ruled on January 31 and stated that the MFP’s efforts to alter the lese-majeste rules were an attempt to undermine the constitutional king.
According to Mr. Niwatchai, NACC investigators are now assembling facts and gathering statements. He added that the 44 Members in question would be summoned once they had finished to understand the claims made against them.
” Using the Constitutional Court ruling alone]as a basis for the investigation ] wo n’t be fair to the accused”, he said.
Ekkawit Watchawalkhu, a NACC member, stated on Thursday that the accused may have the opportunity to protect themselves and that the inquiry never be rushed.
The analysis will be complete, taking all information and legal factors into account, he said, before adding the Constitutional Court decision may be taken into consideration.
The NACC will receive the details of the August 7 decision against the MFP next year, according to Mr. Theerayut’s promise on Thursday to assist with the research.
The Supreme Court will hear the case if the 44 Members are found to be acting improperly by the NACC and the court’s decision is legally bound on all organizations.
If they are found to be guilty, they could be banned from running in primaries.
Ruangkrai Leekitwattana, a political advocate, urgently requested that the NACC bring the case against the 44 officials before the Supreme Court. He claimed that the NACC should never actually conduct an investigation, but that the Constitutional Court’s decisions could be used as evidence.