Jump to content

Legal obstacles await leader of victorious Move Forward party


Recommended Posts

Posted

image.jpeg

A legal challenge is waiting for Pita Limjaroenrat, leader of the Move Forward Party, who is tipped to be the country’s next prime minister after his party emerged as the winner of Sunday’s general election.

 

Last week, political activist Ruangkrai Leekitwattana filed a complaint with the Election Commission (EC), claiming that Pita is violating the Constitution, which prohibits owners or shareholders of media firms from running for political office.

 

Ruangkrai asked the EC to disqualify and remove Pita from the race because Pita holds 42,000 shares in ITV Plc, which is a media firm.

 

ITV was Thailand’s first independent broadcaster, set up in the aftermath of the May 1992 uprising and ceased operations in 2007.

 

Full story: https://www.thaipbsworld.com/legal-obstacles-await-leader-of-victorious-move-forward-party/

 

Logo-top-.png

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2023-05-15
 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

The most versatile and flexible rental investment and holiday home solution in Thailand - click for more information.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
Just now, Jumbo1968 said:

It ITV ceased operations his shares will be worthless, with his education background I think he will have covered his backside.

maybe it's news to you, but many companies that went out of operation still hold licenses, patents, real estate, etc.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, edwinchester said:

Wifey says that they were his father's shares that were transferred to Pita when his father died as he is executor of his father's will. I guess they are his in name only until his father's estate is settled.

I sure hope this is true!  For the future of Thailand.

According the the Thai PBS original reporting of this filing to the EC, he is shareholder #6121.  In the OP here, it is reported that he is #7138.

https://www.thaipbsworld.com/move-forward-party-leaders-political-future-uncertain/

So there is some kind of shenanigans going on here.  Which shareholder# is he?

At least they have the number of shares consistent between the two.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, webfact said:

ITV was Thailand’s first independent broadcaster, set up in the aftermath of the May 1992 uprising and ceased operations in 2007.

So it's not a company, which means he can't own any shares.

 

Is the company traded on the Thai stock exchange and are his shares valid or not?

 

A company that is not trading is not a company at all. I believe the term they use in the UK is 'dormant' and after a period of time being dormant they are no longer companies, I think the term is 'dissolved' but I'm not 100% on that. This is smaller Ltd companies though that are not publicly traded.

 

 

Edited by ukrules
Posted
43 minutes ago, edwinchester said:

Wifey says that they were his father's shares that were transferred to Pita when his father died as he is executor of his father's will. I guess they are his in name only until his father's estate is settled.

This is what I read in an article, but I can't find it now. The shares are part of his father's estate and he currently manages the trust while the estate is settled. Also, the law isn't a blanket ban. It says you can't own more than 5% stake of a media company and the shares account for less than 1%. The implication was that they are really scraping the barrel if this is all they could find on him.

I wish I could find the original article again. If anyone comes across this from a reliable source, please let us know. 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, ukrules said:

So it's not a company, which means he can't own any shares.

 

Is the company traded on the Thai stock exchange and are his shares valid or not?

 

A company that is not trading is not a company at all. I believe the term they use in the UK is 'dormant' and after a period of time being dormant they are no longer companies, I think the term is 'dissolved' but I'm not 100% on that. This is smaller Ltd companies though that are not publicly traded.

 

 

According to the article I posted above, ITV still 'trades', it runs some kind of radio show, and has a website with advertising revenue.  It reported 21 million baht revenue in 2022.

Ugh, I have a sick feeling about this...

Posted

Maybe they should inspect Ruangkrai Leekitwattana who knows what he has to hide or in is involved.. It is easy for one man to keep a whole country hostage??? Why is he doing that, what is his profit ??? NACC had no problem with it and the EcC should know it already why spend time on this issue?? 

  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Up 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Purdey said:

Why didn't he just get rid of the shares before the election?

Is he too stupid to be the PM? 

From what I've read they were held in estate. I'm no lawyer but I think until the estate is settled the money/shares/stock etc are not yours. Just a thought.

  • Like 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, ukrules said:

Well they're not voting for a president here, it's a parliamentary system.

 

Wouldn't the worst case scenario be that they are one MP down and they can choose another leader and there you have it - your new Prime Minister.

 

So hopefully that would mean that Chaitawat Thulaton is next in line.  However, I would think the worst case scenario would be dissolution of the party ala K. Pita's previous party in 2019.

Apparently K. Pita is not the only one with media company share issues...   

https://prachataienglish.com/node/10359

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Dogmatix said:

Even though worthless, he should have transferred them to someone else.

The shares are not in his name they are in the family trust name 

Posted
1 hour ago, steven100 said:

well that settles that then  '.......... he can't be the PM.    Welcome back Khun Prayut ,  your chair is still warm  !

 

Stop drinking and smoking weed 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, steven100 said:

I never smoked weed .. ever.

Ever been drunk on alcohol? Causes more damage to your body than a chuff or two. Never know what will happen with the dope laws. I'm hoping they will see sense and at the very least leave it dicrimanalised. 

Edited by dinsdale
  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ukrules said:

Well they're not voting for a president here, it's a parliamentary system.

 

Wouldn't the worst case scenario be that they are one MP down and they can choose another leader and there you have it - your new Prime Minister.

 

Except they don't have enough votes in the house to overcome the 250 in the senate.  Lots of people seem to be missing that point.

 

Anutin, Prawit, and Prayut have 147 votes plus the 250 senate votes.  So 397 total.

If all the other parties agree to vote together that would give them 353 votes total.

And if the democrat party goes with the current leaders that will move it another 25 votes in the wrong direction.

 

So the oppostion may control the house but they don't control the PM.

Edited by rwill

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...