Decision not to appoint Sirichai as Supreme Court president defended

[webfact]

Decision not to appoint Sirichai as Supreme Court president defended

By THE NATION

 

 

BANGKOK: -- THE COURTS of Justice yesterday stood behind its decision not to appoint Sirichai Wattanayothin as Supreme Court president.

Sirichai resigned as Appeal Court president on Tuesday due to disappointment with what he suggested was unfair treatment.

 

Suebpong Sripongkul, a spokesman for the Office of the Courts of Justice, said the agency’s decisions and actions regarding Sirichai were in line with existing laws and regulations.

 

Sirichai announced his resignation as head of the Appeal Court after being demoted to an inactive position. He told a press conference that he had decided to quit after being offered the unprecedented position of adviser to the Supreme Court president, a position he said was created especially for him after he failed to get the promotion.

 

Previously Sirichai was the most senior candidate for the country’s highest court.

 

The panel instead nominated the second-most senior candidate to become the next court president and replace the current office holder who is to retire at the end of September.

 

In response to Sirichai’s allegation of unfair practices by the nomination subcommittee, Suebpong told a press conference at the Criminal Court building yesterday that Sirichai had been allowed to explain himself before the panel and it concluded that he was unsuitable for the top job. 

 

He also said Sirichai had been investigated because he was accused of violating the disciplinary regulations. If the Judicial Committee had failed to set up a fact-finding team to investigate the accusation, they would be deemed to be negligent, he added.

 

The spokesman said the nomination panel had listened to verbal explanations by Sirichai and testimony from his witnesses, as well as looked into evidence that he had submitted. The subcommittee finally voted 19 to one to not nominate him, he added.

Suebpong said the Judicial Committee, which mainly consists of senior judges, based their decision on a suggestion by the nomination subcommittee. When Sirichai failed to be nominated, the committee’s secretary was required by law to nominate the next senior candidate.

 

In response to Sirichai’s claim that the post of adviser to the Supreme Court president had been created unlawfully just for him, the spokesman said the law on judicial officials empowered the Judicial Committee to create new positions with specific assignments.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30321232

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-07-20

[klauskunkel]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

the law on judicial officials empowered the Judicial Committee to create new positions with specific assignments.

What a sweet law. My law on klauskunkel allows me to change my positions from lying down to sitting on the sofa with my feet up whenever I want. Ooops, there comes the wife with a broom and article 44.