The Move Forward party has submitted a detailed rebuttal to the Constitutional Court today, countering charges placed by the Election Commission (EC) that it attempted to undermine the constitutional monarchy. The EC accuses the party of using its election campaign to push for changes to the nation's lèse majesté law, a statute that protects the monarchy from criticism.

 

The EC seeks to have the party dissolved and its executive committee members banned from politics for a decade. Party leader Chaithawat Tulathon crafted the rebuttal, asserting that Move Forward has no intention of toppling the monarchy and denies any wrongdoing.

 

Speaking today, party spokesman Parit Wacharasindhu announced they would reveal the full content of their defence this Sunday. This date coincides with the district level selection of new senators, an event expected to draw significant public attention. Wacharasindhu emphasised that the timing is unrelated to any political manoeuvring but is rather a matter of transparency.

 

This case has captured widespread attention as it touches on sensitive aspects of national identity and political freedom. The lèse majesté law, central to this controversy, is heavily ingrained in the nation's legal system, making any efforts to amend it highly contentious. Move Forward has argued that their campaign merely aims to modernise the law in a way that upholds democratic values without harming the monarchy.

 

Observers are closely watching how the Constitutional Court will navigate this complex issue, torn between upholding traditional values and endorsing political freedoms. The court has yet to set a date for the ruling, but the outcome could have far-reaching implications for the country's political landscape.

 

For now, the public awaits Sunday for a clearer view of Move Forward's defence, as questions about the balance between national tradition and political reform hang in the air.

 

Picture courtesy: Thai PBS

 

-- 2024-06-05

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The Move Forward party has submitted a detailed rebuttal to the Constitutional Court today, countering charges placed by the Election Commission (EC) that it attempted to undermine the constitutional monarchy. The EC accuses the party of using its election campaign to push for changes to the nation's lèse majesté law, a statute that protects the monarchy from criticism.

They openly said the wanted to "amend" the laws to bring it into the 21st century.. not keep it in the dark ages as tool to suppress criticism of the government or bring down the monarchy.

The EC is way out of line on this issue, they used it to try to kill off any opposition to the now ruling clowns

And the dinosaurs still clinging to power by means fair or foul.

More often or not - foul.

2 hours ago, hotchilli said:

They openly said the wanted to "amend" the laws

That is the power of the electorate under a constitutional monarchy - to establish and regulate the authority of a monarchy by the majority of the electorate. As such, all citizens of the State are not above the law.

See the Magna Carta of 1215.

• "It (the Magna Carta) sought to prevent the king from exploiting his power, and placed limits of royal authority by establishing law as a power in itself." https://www.parliament.uk

Just the opposite would be an absolute monarchy wherein the citizens are bound by the sole power of a monarchy which is above the laws.

Note that Section 3 of the Thai constitution states that  "Sovereign powers belong to the Thai people."

And how is that power exercised? "...through the National Assembly (aka National Legislative Assembly consisting of the House and Senate), the Council of Ministers and the Courts..."  https://www3.ago.go.th

MFP is following the law under the Constitution with its anticipated amendment(s). 

Up to the Thai citizens to ultimately decide but ... if I were filing an Amicus Brief, it would point out that the current law has been missed for political aims for years, which in itself insulted by allowing the misuse the protective law.

19 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

That is the power of the electorate under a constitutional monarchy - to establish and regulate the authority of a monarchy by the majority of the electorate. As such, all citizens of the State are not above the law.

See the Magna Carta of 1215.

• "It (the Magna Carta) sought to prevent the king from exploiting his power, and placed limits of royal authority by establishing law as a power in itself." https://www.parliament.uk

Just the opposite would be an absolute monarchy wherein the citizens are bound by the sole power of a monarchy which is above the laws.

Note that Section 3 of the Thai constitution states that  "Sovereign powers belong to the Thai people."

And how is that power exercised? "...through the National Assembly (aka National Legislative Assembly consisting of the House and Senate), the Council of Ministers and the Courts..."  https://www3.ago.go.th

MFP is following the law under the Constitution with its anticipated amendment(s). 

100% correct.... but the law in Thailand is very flexible when need be, and we seem to have an absolute monarchy.

Sovereign rights of the people are often ignored, as is the constitution.

Anything that might disrupt or raise questions about He that cannot be mentioned, income, will never ever be allowed to run the Government here. NEVER.

It is simply the latest iteration where the powers that be simply block any attempts to challenge their hegemony.

 

Has the MVP ever really been able to move forward?