PUBLISHED: 1 Jul 2024 at 19: 20
According to court president Nakharin Mektrairat, the Constitutional Court is likely to hear two high-profile cases before September that will decide the fate of the main opposition group, the Move Forward Party ( MPP ) and Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin.
When it meets on Wednesday, the judge will take the two cases up. The judges will examine the evidence presented by the defendants, and Mr. Nakharin said it was unnecessary to establish the results of an investigation.  ,
” That will be discussed among the judges first”, he said, adding he could n’t comment on the matter, because it could be seen as interfering with the court’s independence.
Mr. Nakharin assured that the circumstances would be carefully deliberated and that each judge in each case would have the freedom to make their own decisions.
When asked about MFP key adviser Pita Limjaroenrat’s notes regarding the party’s attempt to break, Mr. Nakharin responded that the court is not a party in the conflict and does not want to listen to any notes.
Mr. Pita asserted at a press conference earlier this month that the Constitutional Court has no authority to break the MFP and that the party’s earlier decision regarding the party’s position on the stability majeste law is unrelated to the present case.
He made the comment despite the Constitutional Court’s warning that all parties involved in the case, including the MFP and the Election Commission (EC ), should abstain from speaking out on the matter pending a trial. The court claimed that doing so could deceive the jury and influence the outcome of the trial.
The EC filed the case against the MFP in March after the judge ruled on January 31 that the MFP’s attempts to alter Part 112 of the Criminal Code reflected an attempt to sabotage the constitutional king.
The EC argued that the group violated Section 92 of the natural laws on political events, which gives the jury the authority to break any party that threatens the democratic king.
The surveys firm requested from the court to dissolve the organization, forbid its professionals from running in upcoming elections, and forbid them from forming new organizations for ten years under Sections 92 and 94 of the law. The judge granted the receiving request on April 3.
In the most recent cabinet reshuffle, a group of 40 caregiver lawmakers filed a complaint to replace Mr. Srettha from office for violating the law by appointing Pichit Chuenban as a PM’s Office secretary.
The senators claimed that Pichit, who had previously represented on parole former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in a contentious area dispute, was inadequate to hold a government position because of his time in prison for contempt of court.
They accused Pichit and the excellent minister of moral abatement. The judge agreed to hear the case against Mr. Srettha but rejected the circumstance against Pichit because he had already resigned when they filed the complaint.
One of the cases, involving the legality of the Thai-Cambodge memorandum of understanding from 2001 regarding combined development in the Gulf of Thailand, is scheduled to be heard on Wednesday, according to Mr. Nakharin.
Paiboon Nititawan, the deputy leader of the Palang Pracharath Party ( PPRP ), filed the petition last month, alleging that the document had not been approved by the Thai parliament as a result of its” no legal effect from inception.”
In a separate conference on Monday, Mr. Nakharin stated that clarity “has its limits” when it comes to administrative proceedings or regional security concerns.
” Authorities control sensitive data. If we were to disclose everything, we would n’t be able to act as arbiters”.