Putting into issue PM’s government selection subject to discussion on Thursday
On Thursday, the Constitutional Court will be in the news to decide whether to accept a complaint asking for Srettha Thavisin’s resignation in light of his choice to assign Pichit Chuenban to the cabinet.
Given the uncertainty surrounding his registration, Mr. Pichit resigned as a secretary of the PM’s office on Tuesday in what was thought to be an attempt to shield Mr. Srettha from potential legal repercussions.
However, it is still to be seen whether the court may proceed with the complaint filed by a group of 40 lawmakers, who allege both Mr. Pichit and the Prime Minister to be in breach of governmental morality.
Mr Srettha could face expulsion from work if the judge accepts the petition, say legitimate watchers.
The petition, submitted via Senate speaker Pornpetch Wichitcholchai, asks the court if Mr Srettha and Mr Pichit should be terminated from their positions under Section 170 ( 4 ) and ( 5 ) of the constitution, which deals with the ethics of cabinet ministers.
According to a supply at the court, the judges would consider Section 51 of the court’s rules before deciding whether to accept the plea.
The court may ignore a petition if there are no grounds for it or a petition is withdrawn, as provided in the section, unless the court decides to continue with the petition in the interest of the public.
Nattacha Boonchaiinsawat, a Move Forward Party deputy president in Bangkok, claimed on Wednesday that the latest reshuffle’s meetings were never based on merit.
” Cabinet votes were split based on each party’s limit.” Rewarding close associates was obvious ]in the reshuffle ]”, he said.
Mr. Srettha, in spite of Mr. Pichit’s resignation, was addressed by Mr. Nattacha.
The MP claimed that he thought the resignation would n’t have an impact on what the court would think and that the petition would move forward with the premier’s petition.
When Mr. Pichit represented former top Thaksin Shinawatra in a contentious land situation in 2008, he was sentenced to a year in prison for contempt of court for an attempted bribery case.
After they attempted to pay court authorities by handing them a report case containing 2 million baht in cash a month earlier, the Supreme Court sentenced Mr. Pichit and two of his associates to six months in prison.
In the Ratchadaphisek area circumstance, for which Thaksin received a two-year prison sentence in 2008, all three of Thaksin’s former partners, Khunying Potjaman na Pombejra and his ex-wife, were represented.
Prior to submitting the new government line-up for royal support, Mr. Srettha claimed to have contacted the Council of State, the government’s legal shoulder, for legal advice regarding Mr. Pichit’s appointment.
Prior to this, a resource within the government claimed that Mr. Pichit’s prison in the case of 2008 did not prevent him from being chosen as a cabinet minister. Between finishing a prison term and the appointment, the conviction had long passed the necessary 10-year break.
However, the question of whether Mr. Pichit upholds the moral and ethical standards enshrined in the contract is a different topic, according to the cause.
Former Constitutional Court judge Supoj Khaimuk claimed that the court may need to check whether Mr. Srettha had really inquired about Mr. Pichit’s moral standards before accepting the petition.
The prime minister was aware that if he had inquired about Mr. Pichit’s compliance with the Council of State’s moral standards, his decision would not have been favorable, according to Mr. Supoj.