The Constitutional Court ruled today (31 January) that the Move Forward Party and its former leader Pita Limjaroenrat abused their constitutional rights and liberties in a bid to overthrow the democratic regime with the King as the Head of State by campaigning to amend the royal defamation law.

Move Forward Party MPs during a press conference following the court ruling.

The Court ruled that campaigning to amend the royal defamation law such so that only the Bureau of the Royal Household would be allowed to file complaints constituted an effort to reduce protection for the King and pit the monarchy against the people.

It also ruled that proposing amendments to the royal defamation law and publishing content on the party’s website similar to a draft amendment the party proposed last parliament term indicates the party not only planned to reduce protection for the monarchy but sought to hide its intention through the use of legislative processes. Asserting that the royal family is above politics and politically neutral, the Court declared that proposing to amend the royal defamation law as part of an election campaign amounted to ‘lowering’ the institution and allowing it to be exploited for the party's own benefit during the election. It also found that this put the monarchy in direct conflict with the people and was politically divisive.

The Court ordered Move Forward and Pita to end all actions and forms of expression related to repeal of the royal defamation law. It also prohibit any future amendment to the royal defamation law through any means “that are not the lawful legislative process.”

Pita said during a party press conference that, although the Constitutional Court equated their attempt to amend the royal defamation law with treason, the party only intended to preserve Thailand’s constitutional monarchy and build a consensus for the country to move forward politically.

Pita further stated that the party did not intend to undermine the security of the monarchy. He raised the concerns that the ruling would result in the loss of political space for consensus-building and mature parliamentary discussion, affecting the boundaries between the legislative branch and the Constitutional Court as well as their respective roles in delimiting and defining the country’s constitutional monarchy.

“We want to confirm that this is not just about me personally. This is not just about our party, but this is about the future. It’s about the health of Thai democracy and the political landscape going forward,” said Pita.

Answering a question about potential dissolution and what the party is planning to do, party leader Chaithawat Tulathon said that they are waiting to see the full court ruling. He said that the Constitutional Court’s ruling cannot be challenged, but they are preparing for every scenario. The party is not worried, Chaithawat said, but they will not take the situation lightly.

The complaint against Move Forward and Pita was filed by lawyer Theerayut Suwankesorn, who requested that the court rule whether Move Forward was attempting to overthrow the democratic regime with the King as the head of state by campaigning to amend the royal defamation law and for the court to order the party to end its campaign.

Theerayut was a lawyer for Suwit Thongprasert, a leader of the People’s Democratic Reform Committee and a former monk then known as Buddha Issara.

Somchai Prechasilpakul, lecturer at Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law, said that he found the Court’s ruling to be very problematic since it affects the authority of the legislative branch. He noted that the Party only proposed a policy to amend a section in the Criminal Code and has yet to introduce a bill proposing an amendment to parliament.  He also said that the Court’s ruling raises a question whether there is now a limit to the legislative branch’s power to write or amend a law.

“It is very problematic that there is a ruling that proposing an amendment, which is now only a policy, can become an offence as severe as overthrowing the regime,” said Somchai, who noted that the Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) is likely to have seen the proposal as part of the Move Forward Party’s policy package during its election campaign and did not take issue with it.

Somchai also raised questions about the evidence the Court cited in its ruling that Move Forward’s campaign is treasonous, which noted that Pita and other party members had previously acted as guarantors when posting bail for activists charged with royal defamation. He said that using such evidence is problematic and is an exaggerated interpretation of the fact.

“Posting bail is exercising one’s legal right. This means that, if I could post bail and I want to post bail, it is up to the court to rule whether I should be granted bail. But ruling that posting bail for people charged with [royal defamation] means that we want to overthrow the regime, I think that this is a very exaggerated interpretation of the fact,” he said.

The Constitutional Court previously ruled on 10 November 2021 that the calls for monarchy reform and other monarchy-related activities organised by activists Anon Nampa, Panussaya Sitthijirawattanakul, Panupong Jadnok, and associated organisations also counted as treason, as these acts constituted abuse of constitutional rights and liberties with the intent to overthrow the democratic regime with the King as the Head of State. Activists and other associated organisations were duly ordered to stop such activities.