No exemption for any judges on duty in charter change case

Wasant Soi-pisut, president of the Constitution Court, as well as judges Nuluk Ma-praneet and Supoj Kai-muk sought to withdraw from this case due to the pressure being brought by proponents of the charter amendment bill. The charter-change proponents say the three judges could be biased in this case due to their previous roles and their comments concerning this issue.

At present, there are only eight judges on the panel in charge of holding hearings and delivering a verdict on the charter amendment case.

Earlier, the court accepted six petitions to rule whether the charter-change bill pending in Parliament is constitutional or not.

Petitioners say the bill violates the charter as it could lead to a wholesale rewrite of the Constitution and an overthrow of the system of constitutional monarchy.

The majority of the court’s judges ruled that the requests by Wisut, Nuluk and Supoj to leave the panel did not follow the rules and regulations, therefore they would be obliged to continue their duty.

Earlier, Pokin Polakun, a former deputy premier, represented the government and other supporters of the charter amendment bill in testifying before the Constitution Court.

Besides Pokin, there were seven other witnesses including deputy premier Yongyuth Wichai-dit.

On Thursday, Suraphol Nithikraipot, a former president of Thammasat University, also testified before the court against the charter amendment bill. Suraphol said the country must hold a national referendum before amending the current charter entirely, as planned by the Pheu Thai-led government.

The current charter, promulgated after the 2006 coup that overthrew Thaksin Shinawatra, was endorsed by the majority of Thai people in a nationwide referendum, Suraphol said, so it is thus necessary to have a mandate from the public before the government can go ahead with any charter change.

But Pokin later argued that the Pheu Thai Party and other coalition MPs already have a mandate from voters from the last general election to go ahead and amend the charter entirely.

According to Pokin, only charter amendments that would change the country’s constitutional monarchy system are unconstitutional. He insisted that the government-sponsored charter-change bill has nothing to do with that, but petitioners who filed objections with the court are still doubtful.

Supporters of the ruling Pheu Thai Party are also worried that the party could be disbanded if the court rules that the charter-change bill is unconstitutional. Previously, fugitive ex-premier Thaksin Shinwatra’s Thai Rak Thai and People Power parties were also disbanded by the court due to election fraud and other wrongdoing.

The Pheu Thai Party could be the next target, according to Thaksin’s supporters, who say that a new party is already registered and will be used if Pheu Thai is indeed dissolved.

In such an event, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, Thaksin’s sister, would not be affected, since she is not the leader of the Pheu Thai Party.

Yingluck is currently only a party-list MP of Pheu Thai and she is not an executive member who could be banned from politics in the event that the party is dissolved. As a result, she could join a new party along with other Pheu Thai MPs and form the next government.

Hopefully, this scenario will not happen again.