Tension is expected to build after the Constitutional Court yesterday agreed to rule on the status of caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra over the removal order she issued against National Security Council (NSC) chief Thawil Pliensri.
Several government figures are warning the court's decision to consider if Ms Yingluck has breached the constitution in the Thawil case will bring the country closer to a violent confrontation. They say the court's rulings are not quite in line with the charter.
The Constitutional Court has agreed to hear a case brought by 28 senators, alleging Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra violated the constitution when she transferred then-NSC chief Thawil Pliensri in 2011. (Bangkok Post file photo)
In its unanimous decision yesterday, the court affirmed its authority to consider the Thawil case that was submitted by a group of senators led by Paiboon Nititawan.
The petition contends that Ms Yingluck violated Section 266 (2) and (3) and Section 286 when she signed the order transferring Mr Thawil to be prime ministerial adviser in 2011. It asks the court to rule if she must leave her post as stated in Section 182.
- Earlier report: PM gets 15 days to defend Thawil charges
- Rice case: 3 ministers to testify to NACC
Section 266 bans MPs and senators from using their posts to interfere, directly or indirectly, in the work of state officials or in their transfer for personal gain or for interest of others while Section 268 says the ban in Section 266 applies to the prime minister unless he or she performs in accordance with policies addressed in parliament. Section 182 says the premier must leave office if there is a breach of Section 268.
According to the senators' petition, the transfer was not in the public's best interests, but is an attempt to find a position for ex-national police chief Wichean Potephosree so the government could appoint its own man to the police chief's job.
After Pol Gen Wichean replaced Mr Thawil as the NSC secretary-general, the national police chief post was filled by Pol Gen Priewpan Damapong, the elder brother of Khunying Potjaman na Pombejra, Thaksin Shinawatra's ex-wife.
Mr Paiboon and his colleagues cited a Supreme Administrative Court ruling to back their request for the ruling on Ms Yingluck's status.
In its ruling, the court said the prime minister's judgement was unlawful and ordered Mr Thawil reinstated. The transfer orders were not in line with government policies announced in parliament. Ms Yingluck will have 15 days to lodge her defence after getting a copy of the petition.
Caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisaeng conceded a negative ruling by the Constitutional Court would bring down the Yingluck administration faster than the rice-pledging scheme.
"The Thawil case will be a knock-out punch and make [the government] go faster. But it is hard to say if it will play out that way. If the court rules along these lines, the country will be in trouble.
"Things will look really bad if an 'outsider' government takes office. There will be fierce objections," he said.
Mr Chaturon said the Constitutional Court has so far ruled as it pleases, rather than going by the charter.
"If it rules against the government it could all come to an end this month, perhaps before Songkran," he said.
Anusorn Iamsa-ard, deputy Pheu Thai spokesman, said a court ruling against the prime minister would set a precedent which would cause problems to national administration. He said a negative ruling would deter any government from appointing state officials to help it implement policy.
Pheu Thai legal specialist Pichit Chuenban cried foul over the court's decision to accept the case. He said it was extraordinary for two courts to repeatedly scrutinise the prime minister's exercise of power.
Mr Pichit said the move was undermining the balance of power between the three branches.
"Before this, the court suggested MPs can't amend the law. Now the government is coming under repeated scrutiny for its decisions. Now society has to decide how the 2007 constitution wanted the administrative branch to work," he said.
Ms Yingluck reportedly asked her legal advisers if she had to step aside temporarily after the court accepted her petition. She was assured she could perform her duty until it rules, and that she does not have to appear in court herself.
Meanwhile, Mr Paiboon said he expects the court to make a decision in two weeks because the case is not complicated and there is no need to hold further hearings.
He said that if Ms Yingluck is ordered to leave office, without the House to select a prime minister, Section 7 is likely to be invoked to find a new prime minister who will have full authority.
According to Mr Paiboon, the caretaker government would not have to leave office even if the court rules against the prime minister. It will have to leave only if a new prime minister appoints a new cabinet.