CDC reduces power of charter court ‘for crises’

THE CONSTITUTION Drafting Commission (CDC) has decided where power will lie in critical legal situations when no clauses in the constitution are applicable.

It will no longer reside with the Constitutional Court alone. Instead it will be up to the court, the heads of the three power branches and independent organisations to decide jointly which measures or rules should apply, the CDC has resolved.

Also, the drafters have decided to transfer the Constitutional Court’s power over the “ethical standards” of politicians and civil servants to the Supreme Court.

On the ambiguous and embattled Article 7 stipulating that when no articles in the constitution are applicable, the traditional rules should be followed, the CDC had previously decided to empower the Constitutional Court to have the final say.

In response to strong criticism that the court was being given excessive power under the new charter draft, the CDC reconsidered the matter, drafter Udom Rathamarit said yesterday.

However, whether a situation would be deemed “critical” remains under the judgement of the Constitutional Court, which would also be the initiator of the joint meeting to resolve the issue, the CDC spokesman said.

Asked whether that would be fair, as the Court was still the only entity to call for the meeting, Udom explained that the case had first to be lodged by other branches, and independent organisations. So the practice is perfectly balanced, he said.

 

Single seven-year terms for judges

The panel also resolved that the Constitutional Court’s judges would serve one seven-year term with no extension. The previous resolution was that they would serve a nine-year term.

The Constitutional Court judges should not be under 45 or above 68 years old on the day they receive royal endorsement. This is changed from the old stipulation that the judges could be 75 years old.

In addition, the authority to give verdicts over politicians’ and civil servants’ ethical standards has been shifted to the Supreme Court from the Constitutional Court in order to ward off criticism the latter is being excessively empowered under the new constitution.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) would still be responsible for initiating standard ethical cases among political bodies, governmental agencies, and independent organisations before forwarding them to the Supreme Court.

As for when the NACC itself faced ethics-related allegations, the Supreme Court should set up a special panel to investigate each such case, Udom explained.

Udom said drafters had also reconsidered the Supreme Court’s division for matters involving political office holders. Under the new constitution draft, defendants could appeal not only against matters of law, but also facts within 30 days after a verdict was given.

The panel would comprise from five to nine judges.