Thailand’s National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has ruled that 44 former Members of Parliament from the Move Forward Party committed serious ethical violations by proposing amendments to Section 112 of the Criminal Code. The decision, announced on 9 February 2026, clears the way for the case to be referred to the Supreme Court for further consideration, with immediate consequences if the court accepts the petition.

According to reports, the NACC board voted to find all 44 former MPs at fault for breaching or failing to comply with serious ethical standards. The case centres on their joint action in signing and submitting a 2021 proposal to amend Section 112, also known as the lèse-majesté law. The ruling marks a significant escalation in legal proceedings linked to the controversial legislative proposal.

The 44 individuals concerned are former MPs of the Move Forward Party, some of whom are now MPs of the People’s Party. Some of those named were also former members of the Move Forward Party’s executive committee and have already been stripped of their political rights following a ruling by the Constitutional Court.

The 44 named include prominent figures now affiliated with the People’s Party, including party leader Nattaphong Ruengpanyawut, Sirikanya Tansakun, Rangsiman Rome and Pakornwut Udompipatsakul. The NACC decision applies collectively to all 44 individuals involved in the amendment proposal.

Following this resolution, the NACC will now forward the case file to the Supreme Court. Under established procedures, the court will take time to examine the submitted documentation before deciding whether to formally accept the case for trial. This review phase is a standard step in cases involving alleged serious ethical breaches by political office holders.

If the Supreme Court decides to accept the case, any of the accused who currently hold political positions from the 2026 election, will be required to immediately suspend their duties. This provision is triggered at the point the court formally registers the case, rather than at the conclusion of judicial proceedings. The measure is intended to preserve the integrity of the process while the case is under judicial consideration.

The decision adds to ongoing legal and political consequences stemming from efforts to amend Section 112, an issue that has remained highly sensitive within Thailand’s political system. It also underscores the expanding role of independent oversight bodies in scrutinising legislative actions taken by elected representatives.

Thaitabloid reported that the next step will depend on the Supreme Court’s preliminary review of the case file submitted by the NACC. Further developments will hinge on whether the court accepts the petition and schedules formal proceedings against the former MPs.

Key Takeaways

• The NACC ruled on 9 February 2026 that 44 former Move Forward MPs committed serious ethical violations over a Section 112 amendment proposal.

• The case will be forwarded to the Supreme Court, which must decide whether to accept it for trial.

• Acceptance of the case would require any accused currently holding political office to immediately suspend their duties.

  

Adapted by ASEAN Now from Thaitabloid 2026-02-10

 

 

View full record

Why is the old guard always so scared of change ?

Reminder before commenting.

Rule 4. You will not express disrespect of the King of Thailand or any member of the Thai royal family whether living or deceased. You will not criticize the monarchy as an institution. Speculation, comments or discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing His Majesty The King of Thailand or the Thai royal family. You will not link to or discuss any website which contravenes this rule.To breach this rule is a serious issue that will result in suspension or possible removal from the forum.

15 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Why is the old guard always so scared of change ?

A rhetorical question, surely 😉

No comment as my true thoughts on this would most definitely see me sent to the naughty corner.

32 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No comment as my true thoughts on this would most definitely see me sent to the naughty corner.

Sufficient to say, is anyone surprised.

As we are now in the 21st century, it's time clause 112 was changes to remove any political usage outside of for who it was designed to protect and even then its power should not be manipulated to suit any political agenda.

See the dark humor in the number 44?

In a country where numerology is everything, that number is quite ironic.

Remember Prayut’s Section 44 of the interim constitution? That "Dictator's Tool" gave absolute power to bypass the law entirely.

The very system built during that era is using an "ethical" ruling to wipe out 44 former MPs of the Move Forward Party.

Literally the day after the 2026 General Election we now see that 10 of these people (who just won their seats back as part of the People’s Party) might be banned for life!

Same old story, different year. Welcome to "Thai-style" democracy, where the numbers always seem to add up against the people's vote.

The only number I can think of is 555!

Its over for these progressive parties for some time unfortunatly nothing will change look at the election thais dont want change at the moment anyway

17 minutes ago, ozz1 said:

Its over for these progressive parties for some time unfortunatly nothing will change look at the election thais dont want change at the moment anyway

BJT won the election in Issan. To say Thais don't wont change is a big generalisation. BKK is totally orange. That's a lot of Thais that do want change.

As I wrote last week already... as soon as the results of tyhe elections are known there will be a verdict.. and now on Monday the corrupt NACC . rule that 44 MP's must be prosecuted for section 112.. ASll will be done to weaken the People's Party and opposition of the Government. It is pure abuse of a law that is outdated and must be reviewed because it is obvious that now there are too many reasons to abuse this law to eliminate persons who want to change for the better in Thailand.

They were indicted for doing what legislators are elected to do.

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

No comment as my true thoughts on this would most definitely see me sent to the naughty corner.

You wouldn't be on your own over there either.

Anything to oppose any change to this dinosaur corrupted system.

Shamelessly

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

BJT won the election in Issan. To say Thais don't wont change is a big generalisation. BKK is totally orange. That's a lot of Thais that do want change.

Absolutely correct. It's a very dynamic political 'market' these days with a younger and far more savvy electorate from when I first settled here.

Unfortunately, the bulk of mainstream media always focusses on who has "won", who the coalition will favour, and who will become PM.

They should pay a lot more attention to who always gets denied to form a credible opposition and how "independent oversight bodies" can effortlessly make a mockery of the people's will and the nation's future.

5 hours ago, blaze master said:

Why is the old guard always so scared of change ?

Because change will damage the variety of "good little earners" or revenue streams they benefit from.

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

BJT won the election in Issan. To say Thais don't wont change is a big generalisation. BKK is totally orange. That's a lot of Thais that do want change.

He played the nationalistic card and won. I was surprised at the number of reasonably educated middle aged Thais that I spoke to who told me that they would vote BJT soley on that rhetoric. When asked what other policies BJT had none of them could tell me.

All we can wait for is the younger, better informed generation to shift the balance over time.

The election commission is extreme corrupt. The elite maintain control, as always. Thailand just doesn't seem to be ready for some progress, I was hoping that the youth would prevail and that they were ready for change and that 15 years of economic decimation was enough to encourage them to move on from the dinosaur era, but apparently we remain in Jurassic Park. Anutin is a poor selection. Status quo.

No law says the government can't change the constitution or any part thereof.

However, I still think PP has been daft to announce it will change "that" one section of the Constitution. Get into power first, then announce a referendum. They'll still lose.

5 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

Thailand’s National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has ruled that 44 former Members of Parliament from the Move Forward Party committed serious ethical violations by proposing amendments to Section 112 of the Criminal Code.

a Member of Parliament (MP) is a lawmaker, as their central role involves representing constituents by proposing, debating, amending, and voting on new laws in the legislature

So these MPs are indicted for doing their job, maybe they should have just slept like all the non-indicted MPs.

The irony is of course that the indictment comes from the NACC whose mandate is to combat corruption..., so where is the corruption in those MPs doing their job?

As the President of the NACC is a political appointee, it is realistic to assume that some of their cases are also politically appointed by those doing the appointing... It may also help that this NACC President is a Pol Gen, which makes him inherently familiar with corruption and ensures unquestioning compliance with those appointment wielders...

The intention behind addressing Article 112 was never an act of disrespect toward the Monarchy. On the contrary, the core objective was to prevent the law from being weaponised as a political instrument - a problem widely documented by legal scholars, human-rights organisations, and even former judges. The concern was not the existence of the law itself, but its selective enforcement, its chilling effect on political debate, and its repeated use against opposition figures rather than as a neutral safeguard of the institution it claims to protect.

This is precisely why People’s Party (Phak Prachachon) and its predecessor, Move Forward Party (Phak Kao Klai), challenged Article 112. And it is for this very same reason that the law is now being invoked through mechanisms such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) - an unelected body whose past interventions have disproportionately targeted reformist and opposition politicians. Whether formally directed or not, the alignment of these actions with the interests of the ruling Bhumjaithai Party is difficult to ignore, particularly in a system where independent institutions have long been criticised for political bias.

This amounts to what can only be described as exceptionally shrewd politics. After Pita Limjaroenrat alarmed the establishment and came close to overturning the status quo in 2023 - only to be blocked by unelected senators and later banned through judicial intervention - Anutin Charnvirakul and the ruling coalition faced a recalibrated opposition. Rather than confronting it directly, they allowed the newly formed People’s Party, under Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, to continue advancing its reformist stance on Article 112.

That stance, while principled, was politically combustible. It ensured that regardless of the outcome of the most recent election, a ready-made legal and institutional pretext existed to neutralise the party. In effect, the opposition was permitted to walk straight into a trap - one carefully set long before ballots were cast. The result was not merely electoral competition, but a strategic positioning of the law itself as the ultimate arbiter of political survival.

The People’s Party were disastrously naïve. They were simply not ready for the dirty, institutional nature of Thai politics, where elections matter less than courts, commissions, and backroom power.

That idealism only strengthened the hand of Anutin Charnvirakul and the Bhumjaithai Party, who now stand largely unchallenged. A coalition with Pheu Thai Party is both likely and convenient.

And once again, the real power sits elsewhere - unelected institutions, senior bureaucrats, and entrenched elites quietly pulling the strings, just as they always have - and we know who that is !!..

Effectively, the closest competition representing the modern middle class has been ejected. Whether formally dissolved or functionally neutralised, the reformist bloc that articulated the aspirations of Thailand’s urban, educated, middle class has been removed from meaningful contention.

What remains is not an absence of voters, but an absence of viable representation - a political vacuum created not at the ballot box, but through legal and institutional exclusion.

The People’s Party have been (or are likely to be) ejected from politics by the very mechanism they sought to dismantle.

A 3rd world country ? Developing country ? All i see is a backward thinking country that should be at the top of the corruption index.

Shameful !

....meanwhile ..no real progress on the criminals behind the building collapse ...I guess some other issues take precedence over innocent deaths.

Of course they would, lets not have a party the people want..long live corruption lol

"If the Supreme Court decides to accept the case, any of the accused who currently hold political positions from the 2026 election, will be required to immediately suspend their duties. This provision is triggered at the point the court formally registers the case, rather than at the conclusion of judicial proceedings. The measure is intended to preserve the integrity of the process while the case is under judicial consideration."

Guilty until proved guilty?

Let the games begin.

Well, knock me down with a feather, who would have thought the dinosaurs would use the election to get rid of more populist m.p.'s.

On 12/27/2025 at 7:19 PM, BerndD said:

Then the “brown envelopes” become “brown garbage bags”.

Anybody SURPRISED????? No.

3 hours ago, ozz1 said:

Its over for these progressive parties for some time unfortunatly nothing will change look at the election these don't want change at the moment anyway

I think you are selling things short.

There is a belief that the change will be slow.

The Thai-Cambodian skirmish brought a lot of patriotism out in the country.

If you look BJT did not do well int he cities

PT lost a huge amount of ground in cities.

Remember a lot of the people living inthe country are older and have strong routes to the old system it will take time and effort to get the word to them.

BJT has never run a government for any period of time worth mentioning. This will be their chance to show they are different and can do things to help the country and not just the rich.

There are certain laws in Thailand, just as in other countries, that are being used for purposes other than what they were meant for. People in the U.S. are wondering how TRUMP can use old laws to maintain his power.

The thing that the NACC and the powers that be do not realize is that if you keep using the courts to change elections, you are only going to give more power to the group you are affecting. Does anyone think that removing a PP MP in bangkok is going in another election get someone other than PP to win.

6 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

It also underscores the expanding role of independent oversight bodies in scrutinising legislative actions taken by elected representatives.

That would only be true if the bodies doing the scrutinizing were actually independent.

5 hours ago, dinsdale said:

No comment as my true thoughts on this would most definitely see me sent to the naughty corner.

5 hours ago, dinsdale said:

No comment as my true thoughts on this would most definitely see me sent to the naughty corner.

Everybody in this forum, silent please !