PUBLISHED: 14 Jun 2024 at 19: 02
The Move Forward Party ( MPP ) argued on Friday that the Election Commission’s (EC ) request to dissolve is flawed because it does not properly adhere to the rules set forth in the organic law for political parties.
In response to the EC’s clarity on Thursday, the main opposition party criticized the dissolution case as skipping a crucial step, including fact-finding and a detailed investigation.
The commission’s decision, in the opinion of EC member Pakorn Mahannop, was based on Section 92 of the natural law, which allows the EC to ask the MFP’s dissolution without conducting an investigation.
But, MFP head Chaithawat Tulathon emphasized that the EC is required to provide the MFP a chance to defend itself before referring the case to the Constitutional Court because Section 92 and Section 93 of the law on political events are related.
The EC may submit a petition to the Constitutional Court to break that celebration when there is credible evidence that any political party has engaged in conduct that is deemed to destroy the constitutional king.
Part 93 states that the political party secretary, when discovering like acts, may gather facts and evidence and provide it to the EC for attention, which may follow the rules and methods specified by the percentage.
Mr. Chaithawat called the EC’s claim that the breakdown situation against the MFP is being pursued under Section 92 “problematic” According to him, the EC may follow Part 93 in order to break a celebration under Section 92.
The EC requested the judge’s consent to dissolve the MFP after the judge’s decision on January 31 that the MFP’s continued efforts to amend Part 112 of the Criminal Code, the der guess law, indicated an intention to destroy the democratic monarchy.
The MFP president remarked that the trial must first hear the case before it is sent to the prosecution, even if a pickpocket is found red-handed.
” Dissolving a political party is a significant decision that calls for fact-finding and research. According to Mr. Chaithawat, the EC may interpret the law to its letter rather than just.
The MFP leader claimed that the EC cannot actually conduct the fact-finding and evidence-gathering process because the court’s ruling on Jan. 31 against the MFP regarding its campaign to update the Lese Majoreste Law.
” We may not confuse the]evidence- getting ] approach with whether or not the evidence is credible”, he said, adding the group did raise this level in its defence.
MFP chief adviser Pita Limjaroenrat said on Friday that the EC was permitted to use the 2017 regulations, which included the investigative process for criminal cases, when it moved forward with its dissolution case against the now-defunct Future Forward Party ( FFP). The EC was never required to follow every step, according to the judge.
However, they were replaced by new rules for gathering data and fact finding in 2024, according to Mr. Pita, and the EC is required to do so when attempting to break a party in accordance with Sections 92 and 93.