It is unusual for Thais to criticise courts and jurists. But such anxiety comes with good reason. Thai law levies hefty penalties on those found to be in contempt of court -- imprisonment of one to seven years and fines of 2,000-14,000 baht.
Those who dare to challenge the justice system are at high risk of being charged and penalised.
The public and media reaction against charter court judge Udom Sittiwiratham shows the unprecedented level of defiance in Thai society right now.
During the past few days, the hashtag #constitutional court has been trending on Thai social media. Meanwhile, critics have openly questioned whether the charter court should be dissolved.
Such an unprecedented reaction comes after Judge Udom made a half-joke against the recently dissolved Move Forward Party (MFP) -- which was disbanded by the charter court early this month.
In viral video re-posted on the Facebook account of Tanyatorn Rojmahamongkol and now run in the national media, Judge Udom is seen making a comment on the charter court's recent decision against the MFP during a seminar titled "The Constitutional Court's role in protecting people's rights and freedom" held on Aug 15 in Surat Thani province.
"The party's dissolution was not all bad news as it has created an opportunity for its successor, the People's Party, to raise funds.
"They've obtained millions of baht in a couple of days. Before that, the [MFP] didn't have [that much] money. That's why they might want to thank me for it", the judge joked.
Such a statement is shocking, especially from a Constitutional Court judge.
Mr Udom is one of nine judges who unanimously ordered the MFP to be dissolved on the grounds that its campaign to amend Section 112 undermined and corroded the constitutional monarchy.
Prinya Thewanarumitkul, a law lecturer at Thammasat University, said Judge Udom's remarks may have violated the code of ethics for members of independent bodies under the constitution.
Indeed, the remark appears to disparage the democratic process that the Thai constitution has been written to uphold and protect.
Regardless of their political ideology, the MFP and the sentiments of the 14 million voters who backed it deserve to be treated with more respect, as do the more than 100,000 people who subsequently donated millions of baht to the newly renamed People's Party.
Judge Udom's half-joke only rubs salt into the wound of those impacted by the latest decisions of the Charter Court, which has been criticised for dissolving the MFP and removing Srettha Thavisin from public office for hiring an ex-con in a senior post.
Suggestions from lawmakers to amend the charter in order to curb power of the independent bodies sounds more rational, ironically, in light of Judge Udom's cavalier attitude.
It will be interesting to see what the court plans to do next with this political hot potato.
So far, the Charter Court has kept mum, as has Judge Udom. The remark will affect the image of court that must soon make a ruling on the 44 MFP lawmakers from the MFP associated with the move to amend Section 112.
After deciding on the future of political parties and determining what is ethical, it is about time for the Charter Court to show its own ethical and professional standards.