One of the biggest political surprises in Thailand this year is anticipated to be a situation in which former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra is accused of having a disproportionate impact over the judgement Pheu Thai Party.
In violation of Section 29 of the natural laws on events, Pheu Thai and its original coalition partners in the Srettha Thavisin management may be disbanded if it is established that they had consented to Thaksin’s reported disturbance and manipulation.
The main claim of undue influence stems from Pheu Thai and former and current coalition party people meeting Thaksin at his Bangkok home on the same day that Mr. Srettha was fired as prime minister by the Constitutional Court on August 14.
Thaksin is commonly seen as the de facto leader of Pheu Thai, which is now led by his daughter, Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra.
At that meeting, alliance people and Thaksin discussed potential replacements for Mr. Srettha. After Mr. Srettha was removed from office, Thaksin reportedly intervened in the selection of a perfect governmental member.
Thaksin recommended Chaikasem Nitisiri, a former justice minister and Pheu Thai’s another prime ministerial member, been put forward for prime minister, but Pheu Thai MPs suddenly nominated Ms Paetongtarn otherwise, studies say.
The Election Commission (EC ) is looking into petitions lodged separately by Thai Pakdee Party chairman Warong Dechgitvigrom, Ruangkrai Leekitwattana, a member of the Palang Pracharath Party ( PPRP ), Noppharut Worachitwutthikun, a former key leader of the political group Phirap Khao 2006, and an anonymous individual.
The coalition’s policies and those of the coalition have been discussed by Thaksin at a high-profile forum on August 22 before being actually adopted by the coalition, among other things.
Main target
Wanwichit Boonprong, a lecturer in political science at Rangsit University, stated to the Bangkok Post that he thought Pheu Thai would be the main target of the coup, while he anticipated the safety of other coalition partners.
” A political crisis will arise if the coalition parties are completely disbanded at the same time.” If they are fortunate, coalition parties will be treated as witnesses. Thaksin and Pheu Thai are the petitioners ‘ primary targets, according to Mr. Wanwichit.
Additionally, Mr. Wanwichit claimed that Pheu Thai MPs chose Ms. Paetongtarn to replace Mr. Chaikasem as prime minister to fend off accusations that Thaksin had manipulated the party.
Everyone is aware that Thaksin has the final say in Pheu Thai. The choice of Mr. Chaikasem was a token gesture. Pheu Thai MPs later rejected Mr Chaikasem and chose Ms Paetongtarn as if on cue,” according to Mr Wanwichit.
He stated that a no-confidence vote against the Pheu Thai government is anticipated after the New Year, and that information from the discussion will be released.
also provide Pheu Thai’s opponents with plenty of ground to file additional lawsuits against the organization.
Wanwichit: Pheu Thai to face hurdles
According to Jade Donavanik, a professor and head of the College of Asian Scholars ‘ Faculty of Law, all coalition parties were required to have known in advance who would take Mr. Srettha’s place after he was ousted.
” The nomination of Mr. Chaikasem was intended to put the water to the test. Eventually, Ms Paetongtarn was nominated. This implies that Thaksin had already decided who would take Mr. Srettha’s place, according to Mr. Jade.
He added that it is still to be seen whether the EC will take action against Pheu Thai or against the coalition parties that attended the meeting at Ban Chan Song La’s residence.
Uniting against Pheu Thai?
Mr. Jade agreed that if the EC spared the coalition parties, they might be asked to join them to testify against Pheu Thai.
After Thaksin criticised them during a Pheu Thai seminar in Prachuap Khiri Khan on December 13, some groups may take advantage of this opportunity to teach them a lesson.
At the seminar, Thaksin slammed some coalition parties for their ministers ‘ failure to deliberate two executive decrees at a cabinet meeting. ” The next time they skip]a cabinet meeting], they should also produce a resignation letter”, he said.
Additionally, according to Mr. Jade, the party will have no prime ministerial candidates left if Pheu Thai is finally disbanded and its executives are expelled from politics. Mr Chaikasem is also a Pheu Thai executive.
Then, Bhumjaithai, the third-largest party in parliament, would have the chance to nominate its party leader, Anutin Charvirakul, for prime minister, Mr Jade said.
” Whether coalition parties will join forces against Pheu Thai depends on it.” The EC will have fewer problems finding evidence against Pheu Thai than against all coalition parties, according to Mr. Jade.
Jade: Events were predetermined
No big deal
The Political and Public Policy Analysis Institute director Thanaporn Sriyakul, however, said he did not believe the case in which Thaksin is accused of having an influence on Pheu Thai to be significant.
He claimed that Pheu Thai and Thaksin had previously perished in a more serious case involving them.
He cited the Constitutional Court’s decision to reject a petition filed on November 24 by Thaksin and the Pheu Thai Party in an effort to overthrow the constitutional monarchy.
Lawyer Teerayut Suwankesorn, who successfully sought the dissolution of the Move Forward Party ( MFP), filed the petition.
No other case, in my opinion, is more serious than this one. In contrast to the alleged attempt to overthrow the monarchy, Thaksin’s claims pale in comparison to that of the alleged attempt to do so, Mr. Thanaporn said.
Following his conviction for abuse of power last year, Thaksin was convicted of abuse of power under the Pheu Thai-led government, and one of the many allegations in the petition is that he used the Ministry of Justice to secure an extended stay for himself at the Police General Hospital to secure an extended stay.
According to the petition, Thaksin directed Pheu Thai to join forces with the People’s Party ( PP ), the former MFP, to push for constitutional changes.
Mr. Teerayut added that the policy statement Ms. Paetongtarn delivered on September 12 in the petition echoed the much-publicized “vision” that Thaksin outlined at the local forum on August 22.
Given all the accusations, the lawyer said Thaksin and Pheu Thai are undermining the royal institution and the country’s multi-party system. In order to impose himself on the nation, he requested that the court stop using Pheu Thai to enslave the people and stop using the party to smuggle power into the nation.
With the support of Thaksin, Pheu Thai has what it takes to compete with the PP in the upcoming election, while Mr. Thanaporn said he still believes Bhumjaithai can’t defeat the PP in the next election.
However, Mr. Thanaporn argued that if Pheu Thai wants to remain in power, it must avoid conflict of interest and contentious issues like the Memorandum of Understanding ( MoU) regarding maritime claims in the Gulf of Thailand in 2001.
Due to the public’s reservations about the government’s planned negotiations with Cambodia over the sharing of natural resources in the Gulf of Thailand under the MoU, critics of the MoU are stepping up their calls for the government to revoke the document.
Thanaporn: Earlier case more serious