Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

NACC Files 44-MP Section 112 Case at Supreme Court Bangkok

The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has formally submitted a case to the Supreme Court in Bangkok against 44 former Move Forward Party MPs, alleging serious ethical violations linked to their 2021 attempt to amend Section 112 of the Criminal Code. The move places several current People’s Party MPs, including leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, under legal scrutiny as they await a court order. Natthaphong said any ruling is likely to come after the Songkran festival if the process is not expedited.

Get today's headlines by email image.png

The case stems from a 2021 initiative led by former Move Forward leader Pita Limjaroenrat, who, along with 44 MPs, proposed five draft bills aimed at protecting freedom of expression and rights in the justice system. One of the key proposals sought to amend Section 112, the lese-majeste law. On April 9, NACC officials delivered multiple boxes of case files to the Supreme Court at Sanam Luang, with court staff taking around 30 minutes to process and move the documents inside.

Of the 44 MPs named, 10 are currently serving under the People’s Party, including eight party-list MPs and two Bangkok constituency MPs. Those include Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, Sirikanya Tansakun, Rangsiman Rome, Wayo Assawarungruang, Pakornwut Udompipatskul, Nattawut Buaprathum, Surachet Pravinvongvuth, Nattacha Boonchaiinsawat, Teerajchai Phunthumas and Taopiphop Limjittrakorn. The case has drawn public attention due to its potential political consequences.

Natthaphong said morale among the MPs remains high despite the legal challenge, with all continuing to focus on their parliamentary duties. He urged the public to follow the ongoing government policy debate in Parliament, which began on April 9 and is scheduled to run until early April 10 before resuming later that day. He added that 20 People’s Party MPs were prepared to address key national issues, including economic hardship, PM2.5 pollution and energy concerns.

The Nation reported that the Supreme Court’s decision will determine the political future of those involved, though no timeline has been confirmed. Natthaphong said the party would continue its work regardless of the outcome, adding that a general meeting must still be held within April under party regulations, irrespective of any court ruling or leadership changes.

image.png

Picture courtesy of The Nation

Related story

Nattapong-urges-supreme-court-to-spare-Peoples-Party-MPs

Join the discussion? image.png

Already a member? image.png

image.png Adapted by ASEAN Now Nation 10 Apr 2026

User Feedback

Recommended Comments

Jim Waldron Silver Member

Jim Waldron

Advanced Member

It’s hard not to notice how familiar this all feels. This echos patterns seen during the Prayut era, where legal mechanisms were frequently used to pressure opposition voices.

Whatever someone thinks about Section 112, dragging 44 MPs to the Supreme Court for proposing a legislative amendment looks less like routine procedure and more like a warning shot to anyone who challenges the status quo.

It’s difficult to see how this strengthens public trust in democratic processes.

unblocktheplanet Diamond Member

unblocktheplanet

Advanced Member

Charging MPs with corruption and ethical violations to quash dissent. There's a word for that--dictatorship.

GarryP Platinum Member

GarryP

Advanced Member

What ethical violations are there for proposing amendments to legislation or does that only apply to a particular section. If any particular section of the law is is open to misuse because of the way it is written or due to lack of clarity, then surely that needs to be adressed through amendment.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.