The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Officer Holders decided today to accept for consideration a case filed by the Election Commission against 44 former members of the now defunct Move Forward party, including 10 incumbent MPs of the People’s party, accusing them of committing gross ethical misconduct by endorsing a bill to amend Section 112 of the penal code, commonly known as the lèse majesté law.
The court rejected the Election Commission’s call to suspend the 10 serving MPs from performing their parliamentary duties on the grounds that there has been no behaviour suggesting that they have repeated or will commit an offence.
The court did, however, prohibit them from expressing opinions pertaining to the lèse majesté law, with a stern warning that it could review its order if this prohibition is breached.
Most of the 44 former members of the Move Forward party, including its two former leaders, Pita Limjaroenrat and Chaithawat Tulathon, have already been banished from politics by the Constitutional Court. Only 10 are serving MPs of the People’s party, including party leader Natthawut Ruengpanyawut.
The 44 defendants have 14 days to challenge the court’s ruling and the first hearing in the case is set for June 30th, with examination of evidence scheduled for August 4th.
Last night, Natthaphong posted a message on his Facebook page saying that he and the nine other serving MPs involved in the case will not stop performing their duties as MPs.
He insisted that their singing of the bill to amend the lèse majesté law is within the rightful duties of an MP according to the Constitution, adding that, in the past ten years, members of the Move Forward party and its successor, the People’s party, have had no intention whatsoever to topple or undermine the democratic system with the King as the head of state, as alleged by the Election Commission.
He urged the public to consider with fairness the ethical standard in question, which has often been misused.
Natthaphong also said that the accusation against the 44 did not stem from the fact that they supported amendments to the lèse majesté law, but from their vocal desire for changes in the Thai society and, as such, they were deemed to be a threat to the powers-that-be.
