Court processes requests “in a different way.”
Even after the Constitutional Court upheld a complaint alleging that Thaksin and the ruling party had attempted to overthrow the constitutional monarchy, the Election Commission (EC ) will continue to investigate former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra‘s alleged meddling in the coalition government.
” Even though these matters concern the same facts ]about Thaksin’s actions], the EC and the court use different laws in the handling of these petitions against Thaksin”, EC secretary-general Sawang Boonmee said on Saturday.
After the court on Friday sided with the complaint filed with it over Thaksin’s reported political engagement, he was asked why the EC is still looking into it.
According to Mr. Sawang, the court’s decision was based on whether Thaksin and Pheu Thai had violated Part 49 of the law, which deals with wrongdoing and claims that they had acted in a way that would be seen as an attempt to overthrow the democratic king.
According to Mr. Sawang, the EC is looking into requests received over the Pheu Thai Party’s reported violation of the natural law that prohibits a party from objecting to being manipulated or interfered with by an observer, which is alleged to be Thaksin.
He made a case for the difference by demonstrating how the EC had rejected a petition challenging the now-defunct Move Forward Party ( MPF ) while a similar petition had already been submitted to the court.
The MFP’s mistreatment of its rights and liberties was alleged to be an attempt to overthrow the democratic system of government with the King as head of state, which the EC has no authority to investigate, he claimed.
Thaksin also faces at least two different legal issues, one of which is being handled by the EC and the Criminal Court, despite being spared the constitutional hurdle posed by the complaint, which was dismissed by the court on Friday.
In the first instance, if it is established that Pheu Thai and its former partnership events in the Srettha Thavisin management consented to the alleged intervention and deception, in violation of Section 29 of the natural laws on events, they could be disbanded.
The Constitutional Court’s dismissal of Mr. Srettha as prime minister on August 14 at his Chan Song La house in Bangkok is the main accusation of unwarranted social influence.
Members of the coalition parties and Thaksin discussed potential alternatives for Mr. Srettha during that meeting.
After Mr. Srettha was removed from office, Thaksin apparently intervened in the selection of a perfect governmental candidate.
The coalition’s policies and those of Pheu Thai’s were discussed by Thaksin at the high-profile platform on August 22 before they were actually adopted by the coalition, among other pieces of evidence that were provided to support the claims.
The previous prime minister’s another case involves his alleged violation of Section 112 of the Criminal Code, or “lese guess law,” in another event. In this case, Thaksin is accused of breaking the rules by speaking in opposition to the Korean king during an exam conducted in Seoul in 2015.
The legal team for Pheu Thai says it will report a counterclaim against Teerayut Suwankesorn, the defendant in the case that the judge dismissed on Friday.