Move Forward seeks more time to prepare defence in dissolution case

Chaithawat Tulathon, Move Forward leader, said he informed the party on Tuesday that he has written to the Constitutional Court asking for a second deadline extension.

On April 3, the charter court resolved to proceed with a judicial review of the case filed by the EC accusing Move Forward of violating the Political Parties Act and allegedly trying to overthrow the monarchy through its campaigns to amend Article 112 of the Criminal Code, or the lese majeste law.

The court initially gave the party 15 days or until April 18 to submit its defence but Move Forward asked for a 30-day extension. The court, however, only gave the party an extra 15 days until May 3.

Chaithawat said that in his letter, he explained to the court that the party needs another 30 days because it has to add a lot details to its written defence, including facts and legal technicalities.

He said the party needs time to prepare a comprehensive defence statement as the case carries severe penalties, including the possible dissolution of the party and the potential political ban on party executives.

“The 30-day period [the two 15-day extensions], is not enough for compiling facts,” Chaithawat said.

“We also need time to seek cooperation from witnesses who will testify in court, so we hope the court will approve our request.”

He said if the court refuses to grant a second extension, then it means the party is not being given a fair chance to fight the case.

Also at the party meeting on Tuesday, Move Forward MPs discussed the government’s plan to hold three public referendums on rewriting the charter.

On Monday, Commerce Minister Phumtham Wechayachai, who is also deputy prime minister, said in the first referendum, voters will be asked whether they wanted the charter, except Chapters 1 and 2, to be amended.

Chaithawat said Move Forward MPs argued that the question was too complicated and may kill the plan to rewrite the charter.

He added that Move Forward will back plans to hold referendums, provided the government simplifies the question first.

Chapter 1 establishes Thailand as a democratic regime with a King as the head of state. It defines the source of sovereign power (the Thai people) and how it's exercised through different branches (legislative, executive, judicial). It also emphasizes the importance of human dignity, rights, and equality for all Thai people.

Chapter 2 focuses on the role of the King within the Thai government. It defines the King's position as head of state and his relationship with religion and the armed forces.