The Constitutional Court said on Wednesday that it had accepted the written defence from the Move Forward Party in its dissolution case and would consider the matter on June 12.
It is not known whether the court plans to issue its ruling on that day.
The court received the defence statement from the opposition party on Tuesday, after granting the last of three 15-day extensions. A copy of the statement has been sent to the Election Commission, which is the plaintiff in the party dissolution case.
The court advised the poll body and the party to refrain from giving any opinions on the case in a way that could influence public opinion and possibly affect its consideration.
Move Forward said earlier that it would hold a press conference on June 9 to share details about its defence statement. Party spokesman and list MP Parit Wacharasindhu confirmed on Wednesday that the event would go ahead, but he denied that the party was trying to pressure the court or influence people’s understanding.
The party just wanted to elaborate on its defence for people who might have questions, he said.
The EC in March submitted a petition asking the court to rule on dissolving the party. It was responding to the court’s ruling on Jan 31 that Move Forward’s efforts to change Section 112 of the Criminal Code, known as the lese-majeste law, indicated an intention to undermine the constitutional monarchy.
Based on the ruling, the EC argued that the party violated Section 92 of the organic law on political parties. The section gives the court the power to dissolve any party seen as threatening the constitutional monarchy.
The court accepted the petition for hearing on April 3.
The petitioner asked the court to disband the party, revoke the rights of party executives to stand for election and prohibit anyone who loses those rights from registering or serving as executives of a new party for 10 years, under Sections 92 and 94 of the law.
The amendments proposed by Move Forward included a requirement that any lese-majeste complaint must be filed by the Bureau of the Royal Household. Currently, any individual or group can file a royal defamation complaint against anyone else, and police are obliged to investigate it. As a result, the party has said, the law has been used by politicians and other authority figures to stifle dissenting opinions.
The party has also called for reduced sentences for lese-majeste convictions.
A conviction under Section 112 currently carries a sentence of between 3 and 15 years. Courts often cite the severity of the offence, based on the sentences, as the reason for denying bail to people awaiting trial or appealing their convictions.
