BANGKOK — The fate of Thailand’s Move Forward Party, which is popular among the younger generation and won the most seats in the 2023 election, may be decided by the Constitutional Court’s potential order to dissolve it. This situation is of great interest to both Thai people and allied countries.
Thailand’s Constitutional Court will rule Wednesday on whether the Move Forward Party violated the constitution by proposing to amend a law that forbids defaming the country’s royal family. A petition to the court requested the party’s dissolution and a 10-year ban on political activity by its executives, including former chief Pita Limjaroenrat.
The dissolution of popular parties, including former iterations of the Pheu Thai Party, has historically coincided with coups d’état in Thailand. Therefore, it’s not surprising that foreign governments or international organizations would show interest and concern for Thailand’s democracy, which has often been interrupted.
The Associated Press, an American news agency, noted that the legal action has drawn widespread criticism as it’s seen as part of a years-long attack against the country’s progressive movement by conservative forces trying to keep their grip on power.
However, the interest shown by foreign governments or international organizations in this matter has been criticized by some groups as an attempt to interfere in the country’s internal affairs.
To Interfere or Not to Interfere
The meeting between Pita Limjaroenrat, the chief adviser to the Move Forward Party chairman, and diplomats from 18 countries, including the UK, South Korea, Japan, France, the US, Canada, the EU, Sweden, and Germany, at the German residence took place six days before the Constitutional Court’s decision on Wednesday.
Therefore, some people criticized this action as a breach of political etiquette and interference.
Criticism on social media was further fueled by comments from former Democratic Party MP Rachada Dhanadirek, who echoed the widespread agreement online. She stated that the ambassadors of these 18 countries should not interfere in Thailand’s judicial process by expressing their support for the Move Forward Party.
Rachada also claimed that these diplomats “lack manners” and called on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to reprimand them.
One of the 18 ambassadors who attended a lunch meeting with Pita spoke to Khaosod English on condition of anonymity.
“I believe the point has been made, and there’s no benefit in prolonging this side discussion about alleged foreign interference. This narrative is being pushed to distract from the actual issue at hand,” the ambassador stated.
Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister and Commerce Minister Phumtham Wechayachai stated in an interview that diplomats representing their governments would not interfere in domestic affairs. He mentioned that talks between politicians, whether from the government or the opposition, and diplomats or foreign representatives are not uncommon.
“I do not believe that foreign countries are interfering, because sovereignty belongs to us. That is why today we should let the judicial process take place as it should. We have to respect it. If we do not respect it, who will respect our judicial process? Let the judiciary do its job,” Phumtham said.
The International View of Thailand
Parit Wacharasindhu, spokesperson of the Move Forward Party, explained that there are three points where Phumtham’s interview matches the facts. First, he confirmed that talks and dinners between ambassadors, embassy officials and political factions, whether government or opposition, are normal. In the case of Pita, he was invited by the embassy.
Secondly, he did not see any statements in the diplomats’ remarks that could be regarded as interference in Thai justice, an impression also held by Phumtham.
Finally, he believes that the government is likely to agree that in a globally interconnected world, the international view of Thailand can influence cooperation in areas such as trade, international human rights protection and Thailand’s opportunities on the world stage, such as membership of the UN Human Rights Council.
When reporters asked Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin about this issue, he said that the ambassadors of the 18 countries probably understand very well that the judicial and administrative systems are clearly separated. The executive has no right to interfere in the judicial process, which is neutral and internationally recognized.
“I respect the judicial process, even in my own case. If there are problems or complaints, it is our duty as prime minister to inform the judiciary and await the decision. As for my case, I already filed it last week and I expect the decision on August 14. I have not spoken to anyone about it and our country is sovereign,” said the Prime Minister.
When asked about the Foreign Ministry’s letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on the case, Prime Minister Srettha said that it was the Ministry’s duty to make it clear that the government’s stance was not to interfere in the judiciary and that it would not allow anyone to interfere in its legal system.
Letter to UN Does Not Prejudge
Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs Russ Jalichandra explained that the letter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was a response to questions based on complaints from special mechanisms regarding past processes, including the Constitutional Court’s decision on January 31, 2024, and the Election Commission’s petition to the Constitutional Court to dissolve the Move Forward Party. The clarification sent included facts and the status of the case as of the date of responding to the complaint, as well as related legal processes.
He countered iLaw organization’s headline “Thai government explains that the party dissolution petition is in accordance with the constitution, emphasizing that Section 112 is already concise and appropriate to have severe penalties” as a headline that summarizes in a way that doesn’t match the content and reality, creating misunderstanding.
“The Thai government is not involved in the lawsuit to dissolve the Move Forward Party and cannot interfere with the Constitutional Court’s decision. This Thai letter does not prejudge,” he said.
The Deputy Foreign Minister also stated that the government does not agree with the dissolution of political parties because there have been many dissolutions of political parties in the past, from Thai Rak Thai, People’s Power, Thai Raksa Chart, etc. The dissolution of parties that are connected to the people prevents the people’s voices from being truly reflected.
“The power to dissolve political parties by the court is in accordance with the 2017 Constitution. Therefore, the government does not interfere with the Constitutional Court’s ruling,” he said.
_____________
Related article:
Thailand’s Progressive Move Forward Party Might Be Dissolved, but Its Former Chief Remains Hopeful
