Pheu Thai MPs and their allies in the Senate appeared very emotional when they decided last week to challenge the authority of the Constitution Court and to seek the impeachment of all nine judges.
Somchai Sawaengkarn (Photo by Kitti Woraranchai)
The defiance of the 312 MPs and senators was in retaliation for the court’s ruling by a 3-2 vote to accept for consideration the complaint filed by Senator Somchai Sawaengkarn accusing the 312 pro-government legislators of plotting to overthrow constitutional democracy by attempting to amend Section 68 of the constitution.
The court also voted 5-3 to accept for consideration another complaint by Senator Bovorn Yasinthorn which seeks to strip the lawmakers of their parliamentary status.
The legislators were notified by the court to submit their defence within two weeks, but in a show of defiance said they would defend themselves in court. Instead, they threatened to ask the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to investigate the nine Constitution Court judges, accusing them of overstepping their authority by meddling in the affairs of the legislative branch.
They maintained that amending the charter is the lawful right of the legislators and there is no provision whatsoever in the charter that allows the court to interfere in this matter.
Three constitutional amendment bills were passed in the first reading by the joint sitting of the Senate and the House earlier this month. They are now before scrutiny committees and are expected to be return to the parliament for the second and then final readings in August, by which time the Constitution Court is expected to have made its ruling on the two complaints brought against the pro-government lawmakers.
The pro-government legislators may despise, or even hate, the Constitution Court for what they perceive as being a biase against Pheu Thai. But it is very unwise of them to decide not to defend themselves in the court against Senator Somchai’s serious accusation.
It is also unthinkable that their legal advisers agreed with such a foolhardy move instead of telling them to do the right thing – which is to defend themselves in the court.
Failing to present their defence on schedule would be a big loss of opportunity in a case which may have a huge impact on their parliamentary status and the fate of Pheu Thai if the court rules in favour of Senator Somchai’s complaint.
There is, of course, a possibility the court will rule against the complaint because, in the minds of quite a few people, amending Section 68 does not constitute an attempt to overthrow parliamentary democracy or the constitutional monarchy.
Section 68 of the charter allows the public to directly petition the Constitution Court to examine moves that could undermine the constitutional monarchy or grab power through unconstitutional means.
The amendment would require complaints to filed first with public prosecutors, an act viewed by Mr Somchai as depriving the public of its right to raise the issue with the court.
The Pheu Thai Party should not behave in the same fashion as its sidekicks in the red-shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), who are more inclined to use muscle rather than their heads in their approach to political conflict.
Above all, they must not forget that the Constitution Court’s rulings are legally binding on the government, the parliament and parties involved in the conflict. Defying the court’s ruling would set a very bad precedent for others to follow, with probably serious consequences.
Would the Pheu Thai Party, or the coalition government, be happy if their political opponents chose follow their example in the future?