Experts question court decision over charter amendment bill
Play
Legal experts yesterday questioned the Constitution Court's decision to review petitions filed against the proponents of a new constitution.
They said the court had no power to rule on the case or order the Parliament to suspend voting in its final reading of the Constitution amendment bill.
Five separate groups filed petitions with the court accusing the Cabinet, the coalition Pheu Thai and Chart Thai Pattana parties, and their politicians of attempting to overthrow the country’s political system by proposing bills that allow the drafting of a new constitution.
Somchai Preechasilapakul, from the Law Faculty of Chiang Mai University, said he wondered if the judiciary had any power over the legislature, the power of which is connected to the public.
He said that though the court decision to accept the petition would ease the political pressure, the root cause of the conflict would still exist.
Chulalongkorn University law lecturer Manit Jumpa also said he disagreed with the court’s decision to accept the petitions, adding that the groups should have filed their case with public prosecutors and that the court had far too many cases already.
Mano Thongpan, an academic on law who is formerly an executive of the Law Society of Thailand, said that he did not think this case required urgent attention from the Constitution Court.
“There is no reason for this case to be urgent. The court needs information from the other side before it issues any orders,” he said. “Also, the court’s order for the Parliament to suspend its legislative process is not supported by any law.”
The law experts were speaking at a seminar entitled “Who has the Power of Legislating the Constitution?” held at the Siam City Hotel.
Political scientist Likhit Dhiravegin, speaking at the same seminar, also questioned the court citing Article 68 for its decision to accept the petitions directly from the people, not a state agency.
Meanwhile, deputy Senate speaker Nikom Wairatpanit said yesterday that the Constitution Court’s order suspending the legislative process by citing a constitutional clause was unprecedented.
When speaking on “Constitution Court and Power under Article 68”, he said it appeared the court had made an inaccurate interpretation of the constitutional clause when deciding to accept the case for judicial review.
“MPs and senators have the power of amending the Constitution. There are no reasons to postpone the amending of the Constitution. If the court order is followed, it would also be against the principle of the law,” he said.
