News Mania Desk/Agnibeena Ghosh/14th August 2024
Thailand’s Constitutional Court has removed Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin from office, ruling that he violated constitutional ethics with a controversial cabinet appointment. The court’s decision, made on Wednesday, centers on allegations that Srettha breached ethical guidelines related to his role.
The court, in a narrow 5-4 decision, found that Srettha had acted improperly by appointing a lawyer with a criminal record to his cabinet. The specific details of the cabinet appointment were not disclosed, but the action was deemed a serious ethical lapse. This case was brought to the court by former senators appointed by the previous ruling junta, who challenged Srettha’s adherence to constitutional norms.
Judge Punya Udchachon, delivering the court’s ruling, emphasized that the prime minister’s conduct undermined the integrity expected of his office. “The court rules by a majority of five to four that the ministerial position of the prime minister is terminated under the constitution, because he has not shown honesty in appointing this minister,” Udchachon stated.
The ruling comes on the heels of another significant court decision made the previous week. The same court dissolved the Move Forward Party (MFP), the primary opposition party, and imposed a ten-year political ban on its former leader. This series of judicial actions has intensified the political landscape in Thailand, highlighting the ongoing tensions between the judiciary and political actors.
The legal controversy involved the appointment of Pichit, an attorney with connections to Thaksin Shinawatra, a former prime minister known for his contentious relationship with Thailand’s traditionalist and military-aligned elite. Pichit had previously served a six-month prison sentence in 2008 for a corruption-related offense. To mitigate the fallout from his appointment, Pichit resigned from the cabinet following the court’s scrutiny.
Srettha Thavisin, who assumed office less than a year ago, led a coalition government headed by the Pheu Thai Party. His tenure had been marked by attempts to balance relations between various political factions, including those affiliated with the military. The dismissal reflects ongoing political volatility in Thailand, where alliances and political strategies frequently shift.
In response to the court’s verdict, Srettha expressed his respect for the decision, though he admitted that the outcome was unexpected. His removal adds to the recent political upheaval in Thailand, underscoring the challenges faced by leaders navigating a complex and often contentious political environment.
As Thailand grapples with these political developments, the impact of the court’s decisions will likely continue to reverberate through the country’s governance and political dynamics. The removal of Srettha Thavisin and the dissolution of the MFP signal a turbulent period for Thai politics, with significant implications for future leadership and policy directions.
