Analysing Move Forward’s legal challenges

The Move Forward Party, which holds the most seats in Parliament but is currently in the opposition, is facing two major legal challenges.

The first challenge is a case seeking the dissolution of the party, and the second involves an ethical case against 44 MPs who co-signed a proposal to amend the lese-majeste law on March 25, 2021.

Both cases revolve around the contentious issue of lese-majeste.

The worst possible outcome for the dissolution case would be the disbandment of the party and the disqualification of its executive members from political activities.

As for the ethical case involving the 44 MPs, the gravest consequence would be the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) deciding to refer the case to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders, which could result in their lifetime ban from politics.

Party personnel have already experienced the severe consequences of such stringent laws, with Pannika Wanich having previously faced repercussions under these laws.

The Constitutional Court is scheduled to consider the petition for the dissolution of the Move Forward Party on June 12.

Meanwhile, the progress of the ethical investigation into the 44 MPs from the Move Forward Party is currently under the review of the NACC.

Both cases are expected to proceed concurrently, with the political timeline suggesting that the outcome of the petition to dissolve the Move Forward Party will be known around midyear.

The next in line will be the case of the 44 MPs. This process will take some time, as it involves detailed investigations that affect the political careers of each individual. The NACC will eventually decide whether to forward the case to the Supreme Court.

Focusing on the case of the 44 MPs, there are currently 30 Move Forward in the Parliament, divided into 20 party-list MPs including Pita Limjaroenrat and 10 constituency MPs. 

If they are disqualified for life, the Move Forward Party or the third-row party would lose 30 MPs from the Parliament and there would have to be by-elections in 10 constituencies. Moreover, it remains uncertain whether, in that incidence, the situation would favour the third-row party of the "Move Forward Group" to regain the 10 constituency seats.

As for the other 14 people, they are just former MPs and do not have much impact on the legislative mechanisms.

There are 10 party executive members who could face temporary disqualification as a result of the party dissolution, including Pita Limjaroenrat and Chaithawat Tulathon.

Analysis suggests that dissolution of the Move Forward Party would not be very significant. Even if the party is dissolved, most MPs will likely spread out to join new third-party groups, although it remains uncertain whether all will join new parties completely.

Additionally, only a few key figures from the Move Forward Party would face temporary disqualification, which would not have a significant impact.

However, the ethical case of the 44 MPs is a matter that warrants more focus, because key Move Forward figures could be removed from the legislative arena entirely.