Verdict raises more questions

The verdict of the Constitutional Court yesterday failed to restore political stability, as government supporters continued to ask if the court had the authority to review the case, while anti-government groups see it as a cue for more resistance.
The court yesterday struck down a charter amendment bill that calls for a fully elected Senate, saying the amendment would violate the principle of checks and balances, which is in violation of Article 68. To Pheu Thai Party’s relief, with no order to dissolve the party, the Yingluck Shinawatra government remains in power. However, the ruling has sparked calls for Yingluck to step down for seeking royal endorsement for an unconstitutional bill and for impeachment of the 312 MPs who endorsed the bill.
The Constitution Court judges voted 5-4 that the content of the amendment was unconstitutional. Also in a 6-3 vote they ruled that the amendment process was unconstitutional under various articles of the Constitution, including a glaring act caught on camera showing coalition MPs voting for the amendment using others’ identification cards. Sources said party dissolution was not recommended, as the judges believed the amendment was not meant to lead to insurrection or to unlawfully acquire administrative power. The judges said individual MPs or senators who voted in support of the amendment did not act in violation of Article 68.
However, the ruling was interpreted in different ways. Chulalongkorn University’s constitutional expert Pornsan Liangbunlertchai noted that the ruling set a new standard in Thai politics, when the judiciary can intervene in the legislature. The whole system could collapse if parliamentarians don’t understand the scope of authority of the judiciary and the legislature.
Meanwhile, the Pheu Thai Party has scheduled a meeting for today to devise tactics to fight the charter court ruling, party legal adviser Kramol Bandaipetch said. The tactics include calling for a joint parliamentary session to discuss the ruling, with coalition MPs and Pheu Thai-friendly senators voting to reject the ruling: the joint session would then pass Article 291, which would activate in future the entire charter amendment, in the third reading.
Outside Parliament, the red shirts plan to launch a signature campaign to impeach the entire nine-member charter-court quorum, and then file a malfeasance case against all of them, under Article 157 of the Criminal Code.
Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana said yesterday that a review was still required to see if the Constitutional Court had the authority to rule on the case. Under Article 68, the Constitutional Court’s opinion can only be sought against persons behind an insurrection, which is tantamount to changing a democratic political system. This authority cannot be used against lawmakers, otherwise anybody can file whatever petition they want with the court, he said.
In today’s ruling, he said the court only ruled that the bill could not be promulgated, but did not provide information on the consequences, which relieves pressure on some groups. As far as Phongthep is concerned, the court apparently did not want to spark a constitutional crisis, if other establishments disagree over the interpretation.
He also said Yingluck did not need to resign, as she – as the prime minister – is bound by law to send the bill approved by the House for Royal endorsement within 20 days after the approval date. She would be violating the Constitution if she fails to do so, he said.
Pheu Thai Party leader and Interior Minister Charupong Ruangsuwan expressed strong opposition to the ruling, asking how the upper house with elected members could be worse than a Senate with partially appointed members.
He said the court’s verdict would widen the growing rift among the people as one faction agreed with power of the people while the other faction supported the power of a few persons. Yet, he said the government would take responsibility for the majority of 63 million people, instead of the opinion of only a few persons.
Seeking the PM’s resignation, elected Senator Rosana Tositrakul, one of the four petitioners seeking the court review on the bill, said: “It is normal to hold the prime minister accountable.”
Democrat MP and another petitioner, Wirat Kalayasiri, said he welcomed the verdict for setting a precedent against the domination of majority rule and the wrongful voting procedures. He said he would cite the verdict as a basis for petitioning the National Anti-Corruption Commission to suspend House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont and Senate Speaker Nikom Wairatpanij. Both chamber leaders had wrongfully supervised the legislative debate, leading to the wrongful casting of votes for the bill, he said.
The opposition Democrat Party is ready to seek impeachment of the 312 lawmakers who voted for the bill, through the NACC.
Democrat MP Wirat Kalayasiri said Senator Tuang Untachai had already petitioned the NACC to activate impeachment proceedings. He also expected the other two bills amending Articles 68 and 190 to also be rejected by the Constitutional Court.
Yesterday, anti-government protesters shouted with glee. Yellow-shirt People’s Alliance for Democracy lawyer Suwat Apaisak said the government was being defeated on all fronts. Former Democrat MP Suthep Thaungsuban, who is leading the anti-government rally, said the protest would continue and protest leaders would not pursue the impeachment of the 312 MPs and senators. “Resignation or House dissolution is not a guarantee that the Thaksin regime is over for good,” he added.
Red-shirt leader Thida Thawornseth told supporters at Rajamangala Stadium last night to go home and see what the Suthep-led rally would do on Sunday.