Court to consider PM Srettha’s ethics case next month

The Constitutional Court announced on Tuesday that it would take the case against Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin for an ethics hearing on July 10th pending the certificate of views from those and organizations involved.

According to the jury, it had given people and organizations the opportunity to write comments on the subject matter within 15 days. This suggestions may help the court take the case into account, the court claimed.

The primary minister&nbsp, submitted his army to the Constitutional Court&nbsp, on June 7. The controversy surrounds Pichit Chuenban’s controversial interview as a PM’s Office secretary. &nbsp, &nbsp,

A group of caretaker senators filed the petition, asking the court to decide whether Mr. Srettha and Pichit should be fired from office in accordance with Section 170 ( 4 ) and ( 5 ) of the constitution, which regulates the ethics of cabinet ministers. Pichit resigned from the cabinet&nbsp, next quarter.

Before Pichit was appointed to the cupboard position, he advised Mr. Srettha. But much before that Pichit was former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s attorney in the “lunchbox money” incident. &nbsp,

On June 25, 2008, Pichit and two other legal professionals received sentences from the Supreme Court for attempting to bribe by handing Supreme Court officers a paper bag containing a lunch box containing 2 million ringgit. He was in office at the time, but his critics have said he is inadequate to be a government minister.

In the Ratchadaphisek property purchase circumstance, for which Thaksin received a two-year prison sentence in 2008, all three were representing Thaksin and his ex-wife Khunying Potjaman na Pombejra.

At the time, Thaksin was accused of abusing his authority while serving as prime minister to facilitate Khunying Potjaman’s purchase of 33 ray of property from the Bank of Thailand’s Financial Institutions Development Fund ( FIDF) at a reduced rate of 772 million ringgit in 2003.

According to the Supreme Court, he was supposed to set a high example by upholding the ethics code for such a assigned place.