Says there is no need to bring a see record.
Discussed: 16 Jun 2024 at 06: 12
The Move Forward Party ( MPF ) petition was submitted by the Election Commission (EC ), and it has additional documents that it wants to disband.
The court was given the documents relating to the case’s constitutional issues by EC secretary-general Sawaeng Boonmee on Friday, according to EC secretary-general Sawaeng Boonmee.
He claimed that a list of testimony was unnecessary because the court had already established enough evidence for the EC to pursue the case against the MFP in light of the court’s earlier decision regarding the group’s position on the stability guess rules.
Mr. Sawaeng also refrained from voicing the MFP’s claim that the EC’s motion to dissolve the MFP is flawed because it does not properly adhere to the rules set forth in the natural laws for political parties.
MFP chief Chaithawat Tulathon, who objected to the EC’s method, said on Friday that dissolving a group is a significant shift that necessitates fact-finding and an analysis. He claimed that the EC may interpret the law to its letter rather than just.
The opposition party was responding to the EC’s clarity on Thursday when it was claimed that the dissolution circumstance had skipped these actions.
In reply, Mr Sawaeng said on Saturday:” This wait for a decision from the court”.
In March, the EC petitioned the court to order the party’s dissolution. It was responding to the judge’s decision on January 31 that the MFP’s attempts to alter Part 112 showed an intention to destroy the constitutional king.
The EC argued that the group had violated Article 92 of the natural laws governing political parties in light of the decision. Any party that appears to be in danger of breaking the constitutional monarchy is allowed to break the prosecutor under the provisions of the section.
The judge granted the reading petition on April 3.
Under Areas 92 and 94 of the legislation, the EC requested the court dissolve the party, withdraw party executives ‘ right to contest elections, and forbid anyone who violates those right from registering or serving as party executives for ten years.
Any lese majoreste problem may be filed by the Bureau of the Royal Household, according to the MFP’s proposed revisions.
Any individual or organization is now lodge a royal slander grievance against anyone else, and police are required to conduct an investigation.
In consequence, the party claims, officials and other power numbers have used the law to stifle dissenting viewpoints.
Additionally, the group has urged less severe sentences for beliefs in the least restrictive countries.
Current sentences for a faith under Section 112 range from three to fifteen years.
Courts frequently use the intensity of the crime as justification for denying bail to those who are awaiting trial or who want to contest their convictions.