What constitutional grounds are cited for dissolving the Move Forward party?

Question

Accepted Answer

Constitutional Grounds Cited for Dissolving the Move Forward Party

The Thai Election Commission has formally requested the Constitutional Court to dissolve the opposition Move Forward party, citing constitutional grounds based on a prior ruling by the court. This action stems from the court's January judgment that the party's platform, particularly its pledge to amend Article 112 of the criminal code, constituted a violation of the constitution. The court determined that Move Forward's campaign to reform the lèse-majesté law was a veiled attempt to undermine the monarchy.
Violation of the Constitution Through Undermining the Monarchy

The Constitutional Court's initial ruling, which forms the basis for the Election Commission's request, concluded that Move Forward's proposals demonstrated an intent to undermine the democratic system with the King as head of state. Specifically, the court found that the party's campaign promises, including the amendment of Article 112, were evidence of this objective. This article, often referred to as the lèse-majesté law, prescribes severe penalties, including up to 15 years imprisonment for each instance of perceived insult to the royal family.
Campaign Platform Deemed an Effort to Undermine the Crown

The Election Commission's decision to seek the party's dissolution was a direct consequence of the Constitutional Court's January verdict. The court had previously stated that Move Forward's electoral campaign, which advocated for amending Article 112, was a concealed strategy aimed at weakening the monarchy. This interpretation led to the court's finding that the party's actions were unconstitutional, infringing upon the principle that the monarchy is enshrined in the constitution to be held in a position of "revered worship."
Precedent Set by the Disbandment of Future Forward Party

The current situation echoes a previous action taken against Move Forward's predecessor, the Future Forward Party. In 2020, the Constitutional Court disbanded Future Forward for violating campaign funding regulations. While the grounds for dissolution differ, the precedent highlights the court's willingness to take decisive action against political entities whose actions are deemed to contravene constitutional mandates or established legal frameworks, particularly concerning sensitive national institutions.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What constitutional grounds are cited for dissolving the Move Forward party?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends