Apichart challenges court's dates on timeframe

By THE NATION

Election Commission chairman Apichart Sukhagganond yesterday disputed the Constitution Court's decision as to when the 15-day legal time frame for filing the first dissolution case against the Democrat Party should have started.

In his first public comment since Monday, when the court rejected the EC's first dissolution case against the ruling Democrats, Apichart said the time frame should not be considered to have started on December 17, 2009, as has been stated in the verdict. Apichart is also political party registrar.

"The Election Commission meeting [on December 17] voted for the political party registrar to make his decision under Article 95 of the 2007 Political Party Act. I don't think the political party registrar was involved at that point," Apichart said.

The court ruled that according to law, the case should have been filed within 15 days after the political party registrar learned of the alleged offence.

Apichart said the Department of Special Investigation had referred the case to the EC, after which an investigation committee was set up to look into an allegation that the Democrat Party had misused Bt29 million of the Political Party Development Fund that was obtained from the EC.

He denied that he had taken the case to court because he was under pressure.

He explained that under the previous Political Party Act, which was rescinded along with the 1997 Constitution, the political party registrar could act alone when deciding whether to seek a party's dissolution.

However, under the current Political Party Act, which went into effect after the 2007 Constitution was put in place, the political party registrar is required to seek approval from the EC first.

"The political party registrar now is like a child who needs approval from his guardian - the EC," Apichart said.

The EC chairman added that though he respected the court's verdict, he reserved the right to explain his case because of the strong negative impacts and pressure for him to step down.

He said he had never thought of resigning as EC chairman and he had more than three years left in his seven-year term.

"I am under no stress now because I have done things in a straightforward manner. I may feel a bit slighted after press reports said that some colleagues were pushing me to resign.

"I am a bit saddened. I have worked devotedly for the country, without any thoughts of dishonesty," he said.

-- The Nation 2010-12-04

Apichart challenges court's dates on timeframe? Being an ex-judge, does he know that challenges court = jail in thailand?

Being an ex judge might be the only reason he can get away with it.

I thought it had been reported that only one judge mentioned the 15 day thing and three others had another reason for rejecting. And now it is only reported that the case was rejected because of the 15 day thing. It gets more confusing by the day, or maybe I dreamt the earlier stuff up

LOL

To me it just looks like another attention grabbing stunt and possibly with political motives for the upcoming elections.

The the 15 days thing is overturn, the final score will change from 4-2 to 3-3.