A noble example of a high court at work in a democracy
Play
What transpired on Friday was, I think, a fine example of how a high court should operate in a democracy, and Thailand should be grateful to its Constitution Court for having taken on this challenge and having handled it so well.
The people now know what a senior court is there for, and are much less likely to be afraid of it, what more to threaten it with crude, street violence.
There are a number of really major, general clarifications in the court’s statement:
1) The Constitution Court can, in fact, be called upon when such suspicions arise – that is what it’s there for;
2) In its ruling the court accepted the call, thanked the complainants and ruled fairly on what it was asked to decide. This is a huge confirmation of the court’s role and proper use of its power;
3) The court pointed out that it is the Attorney-General and the Speaker of the House who must safeguard the Constitution – and if they don’t, nobody can say they didn’t know. I think this will make both offices a lot more professional, both neutral and helpful;
4) The court said that so far there is no proof that there is a movement to overthrow the state – that was the main complaint. But that ruling also acknowledges that the court does have the power to look into such complaints in the future, and both the will and the expertise to deal with them.
There were also two major rulings that impinge specifically upon the two bills that are being presented in Parliament:
1) Parliament cannot write a new charter, just amend individual articles in the present one;
2) A new charter must involve a full referendum.
Lung Kip
Chiang Mai
