Govt supporter questions charter court's mandate

Sangiem Samranrat, a member of the red-shirt movement and political appointee attached to Government House, said the petition would be sponsored by red-shirt ally the Love Democracy Club.
He explained that the panel, chaired by the Supreme Court president, has the power to look into disputes over judicial mandate as per the Constitution’s Article 199.
He contends that the Constitutional Court does not have the jurisdiction to launch a judicial review into the 2014 Budget Bill.
Parliament has yet to pass laws that reactivate the charter court after the 2007 Constitution was promulgated, he said. Hence, he added, the court had no mandate to rule over any constitutional disputes.
Meanwhile, the charter court is scheduled today to hear the final arguments on litigation related to the budget and is expected to form its verdict soon after.
In another development, Parliament President Somsak Kiatsuranont yesterday filed additional complaints about the pending charter change with the Constitutional Court. In his complaint, he cites Article 154 on legislative procedures to question the constitutionality of the charter amendment on filling seats in the Senate.
Earlier complaints invoked Article 68 on overthrowing the political system as a basis for litigation against the amendment.
Meanwhile, Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has slammed Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra for activating the royal endorsement process on the bill before the outcome of the judicial review.
Also, red-shirt lawyer Supawat Thaksin has filed a police complaint against the Group of 40 Senators for allegedly obstructing official business by launching litigation and delaying the enactment of the charter amendment.
The upper chamber is said to be poised to convene a hearing on the PM’s alleged misconduct in rushing the bill for royal approval.
Ampon Kittiampon, secretary-general to the Cabinet, said yesterday that the charter amendment bill had not really been submitted for royal endorsement, adding that his office was still contacting the Office of His Majesty’s Principal Private Secretary on the issue.
“It is not like the bill can be presented for royal endorsement as soon as the premier signs it. Normally, it takes as long as two or three weeks before we can proceed. But this is constitutional,” he said.