In a significant development, Thailand’s Constitutional Court has agreed to hear a petition filed by a group of senators aimed at removing Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin on ethical grounds. The court's decision allows the Prime Minister to continue his duties until a ruling is made on the case.
The petition, brought forth by 40 senators, questions Srettha’s decision to appoint Pichit Chuenban as a cabinet minister, citing a breach of ethical standards outlined in the constitution. Despite a close vote of six to three in favor of considering the removal of Srettha from his position, there was a five to four decision against suspending his duties during the proceedings. Srettha has been given a 15-day window to present his defense after being formally notified of the court's decision.
Pichit, a former lawyer for the influential Shinawatra family, was appointed as a minister in the prime minister’s office in a recent reshuffle. However, his appointment was called into question by the group of senators, alleging that he did not meet the necessary qualifications for the position. In response, Pichit resigned from his post to protect Srettha from potential legal repercussions, thereby absolving himself from further scrutiny in the case.
Although the court's ruling not to suspend Srettha's duties provides him temporary relief, the impending trial represents a fresh hurdle for the Pheu Thai Party-led coalition government. This government was formed following the interference of the military-appointed Senate, preventing the rightful winner of the previous general election from assuming power.
Analysts suggest that the acceptance of the case reflects discontent within the political establishment regarding the alliance between conservative factions and the Pheu Thai Party. Srettha, currently in Japan, expressed his willingness to cooperate with legal counsel to prepare his defense statement upon his return.
The controversy surrounding Srettha comes amidst economic challenges, with Thailand struggling to surpass a sub 2% annual growth rate, lagging behind its regional counterparts. Additionally, his conflicts with the central bank have unsettled markets, as he pressures the bank to lower interest rates.
In a parallel to past events, Srettha’s predecessor faced a suspension from duties by the same court over concerns of breaching term limits. Ultimately, the court ruled in his favor, allowing him to resume his duties. As Srettha navigates this ethical dilemma, both he and his administration brace for the legal proceedings that lie ahead.