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 may examine the evidence provided by those involved in the cases, according to Mr. Nakharin, who stated that it was unnecessary to say whether an inquiry may be conducted.  ,
” 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 each judge in each case will have the freedom to make their own decisions and that the cases may be completely deliberated.
When asked about MFP chief assistant Pita Limjaroenrat’s remarks regarding the party’s attempt to break, Mr. Nakharin responded that the court is not a party and does not want to listen to any remarks.
Mr. Pita asserted at a press conference earlier this month that the Constitutional Court’s earlier decision regarding the group’s position on the stability qualifications law was unrelated to the current case.
He made the comment despite the Constitutional Court’s warning that the MFP and the Election Commission (EC ) should refrain from speaking out on the matter pending a trial. The court claimed that doing so could change the trial and cause confusion in the judges.
The EC filed the situation against the MFP in March after the judge determined on January 31 that the MFP’s attempts to alter Part 112 of the Criminal Code were intended to destroy 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.
According to Sections 92 and 94 of the law, the poll company requested that the court dissolve the party, forbid its executives from running in upcoming elections, and forbid them from forming new parties ‘ professionals for ten years. The judge granted the reading 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. Because Pichit had previously resigned when they filed the petition, the court agreed to hear the circumstance against Mr. Srettha.
One of the cases, which involves the constitutionality of the 2001 Thai-Cambodge memorandum of understanding on joint growth 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 ), claimed the document’s signing had not been approved by the Thai parliament, meaning it “has no legal effect from the beginning.”
In a split conference on Monday, Mr. Nakharin stated that when judicial proceedings or national security concerns are involved, clarity “has its restrictions.”
” Authorities control sensitive data. If we were to disclose everything, we would n’t be able to act as arbiters”.